FujiFilm X100 Discussion « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon Point & Shoot

FujiFilm X100 Discussion

(97 posts) (25 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1…34

NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

SkintBrit said:
I've never been to Hong Kong, but their videos certainly give me the urge to check it out. Maybe they should do a "tour guide" video? :-)

I love Hong Kong, my family is from there. I end up staring at the background in the videos and not the cameras.

jonnyapple said:
Am I the only one who thinks Kai from Digital Rev is pretty funny? Slightly idiotic at times, but funny. I guess I've got a pretty dry sense of humor, but he usually gets me chuckling. I'll have to go check out his X100 review.

I think he's a retard, but sometimes his stuff is funny. Other times it's pretty stupid, like the Lady Gaga thing. I couldn't watch it. I like Lok a lot more though.

I think Doby might be annoyed that we went off topic now. :D

Posted 2 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Yes, he was unfunny in that one about the X100. I just watched it.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Na Na-na Boo-boo. I just got one of the 20 Amazon had in stock tonight.

Sorry I just had to tell someone.

Posted 2 years ago #
Mike Gunter

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 946
offline

TTJ,

Show some pix as fast as you can. It's a lovely concept camera that looks terrific.

My best,

Mike

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Will do. I'm planning on setting it up against my D300 to see what it can do and what I need to change while shooting it. Others' samples look great so I am giddy at the moment.

I have been shooing my Bessa and FE2s mainly so I can have a small camera that is not real noticeable and to have the quality that my G10 just can't do in lower light. I think this will fit my nostalgia desire and convenience that film doesn't provide.

I'm going to pick up some Illford 3200 and Fuji 1600 to fire off a couple of test shots of the same setup as well. I think people would be quite surprised how the film and digital stack up. I have ran through a couple of rolls of 3200 and 1600 over the last month and found my memory didn't serve me as well as I thought.

Ilford 3200

Posted 2 years ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

If you can, I'd like to see a comparison with TMZ as well- I'd be interested to see a good comparison between delta 3200 and tmax 3200 with sample images (not just descriptions).

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Delivered at 12:30. First shot - 12:35. First impressions - I'm digging this thing big time! Menus are clean, quick and easy to grasp quickly. Very, very intuitive design - it seems whatever I want to do the first button I try is the one I need. 5 minutes of playing and I'm at home with the menus and controls. I'm Loving the Viewfinder and is just awesome! Finely found a digital version of what I was doing with my Bessa and FE2 for the last two months.

Traveling this weekend so I will post photos next week.

@jerl My local shop (or anywhere in the state) doesn't sell the 3200 T-max. To get the Ilford I had to piggy back on another photg's film order and it will be 30 days to get it. (Grumble) So few shoot film around here that getting something other than c-41 get's costly. Last 4 rolls of print cost $28 for film and $55 for develop and high res scan. At that rate, the Fuji X100 was the cheaper option than shooing my Bessa or FE2s.

Posted 2 years ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

Yeah, I know what you mean- the local stores around me charge 2-3x what I can get from NYC. I guess I'll wait until my next order to get a couple rolls of each to do a head-head comparison.

Posted 2 years ago #
Super Shooter

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 277
offline

You can always find Kodak BW400CN at local pharmacies. I don't care what the purist say, it's a good C41 B&W film. Besides you're already cheating by using a digicam.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Ok Supper Shooter this was the conversation we were having:

TaoTeJared said:
I'm going to pick up some Illford 3200 and Fuji 1600 to fire off a couple of test shots of the same setup as well. I think people would be quite surprised how the film and digital stack up. I have ran through a couple of rolls of 3200 and 1600 over the last month and found my memory didn't serve me as well as I thought.

This is what you wrote:

Super Shooter said:
...Besides you're already cheating by using a digicam.

So what on earth are you talking about? Or in the ageless human and dog responce - Huh? :)

Posted 2 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Not sure, but did you read the review on thephoblographer of the X100? He noted of weird quirks with the X100. Did you notice anything similar?

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I am in love with this thing. The viewfinder is unbelievable. It is not going to replace my D300 but the G11 is going away.

I just posted a set of photos on my flickr account. The link to my flickr account is on my profile page. Click my name and you will see them.

Note that wind gusts were 30-40mph here when shooting and I shot handheld so it was hard to be razor sharp images. I also only shot in Jpeg since I have not had time to load it raw converter. I have read that RAW files are 10x better. And these files are fantastic to begin with. I have pushed jpeg 4 stops either way with out artifacts. D300 files can't handle that.
-----
Quirks? Well yes and no. Nothing different then what every camera has and you learn to work with it. Everyone has their personal quirks of what they can tolerate and what they can not live with. So far out of the reviews I have read, the sticking points on DSLRs are the same one's they point out with the X100. Some people are just whiny. Everyone needs to understand that: 1) THIS IS NOT A DSLR and it was not intended to replace one. 2) IT IS NOT A LEICA OR A RANGEFINDER. Once people get past that, it is a great camera. Steve Huff has a great review that I agree with 100%. If you really want to get into it, it is a great one to read.

Only two quirks I'm catching is the AF does miss a fair amount and takes a bit to lock. Very noticeable when using a DSLR at the same time. G11 and Iphone were worse. The second is that in really bright sunlight the viewfinder lines and such are hard to see. I kick it over to the EVF which is a toggle switch and BAM perfect.

The photoblogger and others go into the metering. I noticed this also. In aperture priority mode (in the manual) the shutter does not go above 1/0000. Fix - Turn the damn shutter dial to 2000, 4000 or the exposure compensation button. It is all there on top. Or turn on the ND filter. I think if they read the manual and took 10 min to play with it they would get past everything.

This camera is not intended to replace either of those systems.
Against a m4/3 - blows them away on everything.
Nex - I have not used so I can't say.
G11 - blows it away.
P7000 - blows it away.
Every compact I have used - blows it away.

No edits at all. ISO 3200 - Velva

Posted 2 years ago #
mikenothing

member
Joined: May '11
Posts: 18
offline

well it seems like a nice camera, i just dont got why they cant allow it to have some other lenses ....

optimised for one focal length ? get outta here fuji

any rational person would put "interchangeable lenses" above " optimised for one focal length" on their camera function wish list .... surely ?

i hope that the x100 is testing the waters to see if there is a future in this design (perhaps like the m8), and that the next installment will be a proper leica competitor, at a sensible price point.

i hope that more manufacturers pay attention to the interest in the m8/m9/x100 and start making sensibly price rangefinder-sized cameras, WITH some of the freedoms that come with a lense swap.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I have been super busy lately but I thought I would post a couple of pics. I have a full set (most have exif) on my Flickr page.

I did do some editing in Lightroom and Nik but not much more than 5 min worth. I was submitting some of these and really didn't want to back out all the edits. But then again, who just uses unedited images?

Little large - any help on the coding to make them smaller would be appreciated :)

3200 @f/2

Velvia color, iso 3200 AWB - no, zero, nada edits.

Here is my X100 Flickr set:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/sets/72157626543360845/with/5696337623/

Posted 2 years ago #
Super Shooter

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 277
offline

TaoTeJared said:
Ok Supper Shooter this was the conversation we were having:

This is what you wrote:

So what on earth are you talking about? Or in the ageless human and dog responce - Huh? :)

I'll talk r-e-a-l s-l-o-w so you can understand me. You were talking about B&W films,yes? You are shooting B&W with a digital camera, yes? You said you can't find B&W film locally to compare the two, yes? I said you can find Kodak BW400CN, which is a pseudo B&W film, at just about any local pharmacy.

Traditionalist say BW400CN isn't a true B&W film because it's C-41. I said it doesn't matter because you are already shooting B&W with a digital camera. The X100 is a digital camera, yes? D-o y-o-u u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d m-e n-o-w?

And before you give me a lame comeback about 400 versus 1600 film, I have successfully pushed BW400CN up to 1600. They say you can push it as far as 3200 but I have never tried to go that far with it.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Don't need slower, just need a SUBJECT and a GOAL of your statement. :) I know what BW400CN is and have a couple of rolls in the freezer, shoot it all the time. So what did you you want? And what is cheating about using a digital camera? You are in left field dude - come back to the dugout. ;)

I wanted to do a full Side by side with film but my local photo shop got it's 1600 and 3200 and a ton of other Ilford film orders were canceled. Damaged in shipping or something. Anyway from looking at the previous 1600 & 3200 film I can say without a doubt, digital surpassed it a long time ago. 50-400 B&W still holds it own or surpasses digital.

I'll save film discussions to another thread and stick to the X100 here.

Posted 2 years ago #
Super Shooter

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 277
offline

TaoTeJared said:
Don't need slower, just need a SUBJECT and a GOAL of your statement. :) I know what BW400CN is and have a couple of rolls in the freezer, shoot it all the time. So what did you you want? And what is cheating about using a digital camera? You are in left field dude - come back to the dugout. ;)

SUBJECT= BW400CN BLACK & WHITE FILM (a pseudo b&w film) and comparing it to pseudo b&w photos from a digital camera. CAPISCE?

GOAL= I was trying to help you out by suggesting a film that is easily available.

RESULT= I shouldn't have bothered trying to help you.

CAPISCE= Italian for GET IT?

By the way, what's up with that picture of that guy eating his hand? His hand is bigger than his head!

Posted 2 years ago #
Michael DeRose

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 277
offline

great photographs Tao. the night shots alone make me want to purchase this.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Chill out dude. Thanks for the info. Just focusing on the X100 here.

Close focus with a wide-ish lens. Wider lenses tend to exaggerate size at close distances.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Michael DeRose said:
great photographs Tao. the night shots alone make me want to purchase this.

It is a great camera and I love it more with every use. It really has the same IQ or better (low light) at every ISO as my D300. It will not replace a DSLR but it is what I have been looking for a long time.

I have a whole review written up and asked the admins if they want to run it or not. If not I'll post it on this thread.

Posted 2 years ago #
Super Shooter

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 277
offline

TaoTeJared said:
Close focus with a wide-ish lens. Wider lenses tend to exaggerate size at close distances.

I know what a wide angle does. That's just not a very flattering picture of that guy. If it were a picture of me I would be seriously pissed you posted it online.

Posted 2 years ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I posted a write up on my Flickr account. It is a little long for the forum.

Let me know if anyone has any questions.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/sets/72157626543360845/comments/#comment72157626800347272

Posted 2 years ago #