i think it looks very good from the front and ergonomically i like the top. the back side both looks cheap and is not designed well for my use.
i'm quite tempted by this camera, they seem to have fixed all my complaints except for being overly tall to accomodate the ovf (i'll only use the evf) and not having a flip-up lcd. i must decide whether to get one of these or the rx1...
Spyro P. wrote:
more like three of those or the rx1
more like sell a few lenses and get the rx1 or just get the x100s. either one would be my main camera so the price is much less of a concern for me than the usability of the two cameras.
they seem to have fixed all my complaints except for being overly tall to accomodate the ovf (i'll only use the evf) and not having a flip-up lcd.
Each to their own, but I still find this very odd. Isn't the viewfinder precisely the reason for the taller body and the reason why anyone would choose this camera over others?
What stops you buying the NEX 6 if you don't use a viewfinder, want a flip up screen and a flatter shape?
wolfloid wrote:
Each to their own, but I still find this very odd. Isn't the viewfinder precisely the reason for the taller body and the reason why anyone would choose this camera over others?
What stops you buying the NEX 6 if you don't use a viewfinder, want a flip up screen and a flatter shape?
i do use a NEX-7 because of this as my current camera, so no reason to buy a NEX-6. for my use the NEX is better than either the fuji x100 or xe-1 usability wise while the x100s seems to have made the gap much much smaller (subject to me actually handling one of course).
what's missing from the NEX for me is a fast 35mm equiv lens that keeps the camera pocketable. i currently use a 42mm equiv, but it is only f/2.8, which i often find too limiting. if the x100s or rx-1 can come close enough usability wise to the NEX i'll use it instead for my main camera and the NEX will be relegated to telephoto only use.
I wonder what the next step will be for Fuji. This camera is obviously just a minor make over with tweaks (not to dismiss the significance of these). Will they tweak again, improve the lens / sensor / evf? Or start work on a larger sensor version...
^I wish they would improve the lens but I doubt it will happen anytime soon, the bokeh is sometimes weird wide open with contrasty backgrounds.
a 50mm conversion lens would be sweet!
sensor has been improved with the new X-Trans II but I'm seriously hoping that Adobe releases an update to LR4 to support X-Trans better.
EVF has also been improved from 1.4M dots to 2.36M dots.
it will be exciting to see what the new version of the X-Pro1 and XE-1 will be.
one thing I'm disappointed with the X100s is they haven't fixed the menu button and wheel on the back. (annoying to access the menu when you have gloves on, like an eskimo doing surgery)
overall though, I've been happy with the X100, took it out to the mountains yesterday morning then family b-day party in the afternoon, more convenient to carry around than a DSLR.
sebboh wrote:
i think it looks very good from the front and ergonomically i like the top. the back side both looks cheap and is not designed well for my use.
i'm quite tempted by this camera, they seem to have fixed all my complaints except for being overly tall to accomodate the ovf (i'll only use the evf) and not having a flip-up lcd. i must decide whether to get one of these or the rx1...
if you're not a fan of the OVF/EVF then IMO the X100 is not the camera for you. it's one of the main reason why some prefer it over other mirrorless cameras.
I played with the RX1 for a bit and while it takes amazing pictures at 1.4, I didn't enjoy handholding it, also I like shooting with a VF and it doesn't come cheap with the RX1.
I like my X100 because it compliments my Leica when I don't feel like going MF all the time. IMG_3232 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
taemo wrote:
if you're not a fan of the OVF/EVF then IMO the X100 is not the camera for you. it's one of the main reason why some prefer it over other mirrorless cameras.
I played with the RX1 for a bit and while it takes amazing pictures at 1.4, I didn't enjoy handholding it, also I like shooting with a VF and it doesn't come cheap with the RX1.
I like my X100 because it compliments my Leica when I don't feel like going MF all the time.
i agree the hybrid finder of the x100 is one of the big features that attracts people to it, just not me. i'm a manual focus only person so the optical finder on the x100 is useless to me (unlike the one on your m6). what attracts me most about the x100 is the excellent and compact 23/2 lens.
i haven't gotten a chance to play with the rx-1 yet, but how i feel about it will largely depend on how i feel about the evf and manual focusing it.
i'm a manual focus only person so the optical finder on the x100 is useless to me (unlike the one on your m6).
We'll have to see what its like, but the X100s is supposed to have greatly improved manual focus - with both focus peaking and a digital split image.
On spec, this camera seems to have all the features I want, and it is a beautifully slim package too. I can't see anything else that offers this well thought out feature set.
wolfloid wrote:
We'll have to see what its like, but the X100s is supposed to have greatly improved manual focus - with both focus peaking and a digital split image.
On spec, this camera seems to have all the features I want, and it is a beautifully slim package too. I can't see anything else that offers this well thought out feature set.
You have a distance scale in the ovf though, right? That's how I use manual focus probably at least 70% of the time with this f/l.
Spyro P. wrote:
me too, but I always stop down as much as I can
most people do the opposite these days.
Its strange. For casual / fun / every day stuff I guess I'm more patient, relaxed on some level. I'm quite happy to take my time and often shoot around f8 to f16 (35mm/ff). For work I do still have an element of patience in how I work, but I find myself at wider apertures more frequently I think because of the speed at which things move (maintaining a higher shutter) and the lower lights I venture into. I'd often go down to 1/15th, 1/18th handheld for every day stuff, whereas for weddings that would render most things unusable. Probably just differing circumstances as much as anything too.
wolfloid wrote:
We'll have to see what its like, but the X100s is supposed to have greatly improved manual focus - with both focus peaking and a digital split image.
those are only available through the evf, not the ovf though.
ricardovaste wrote:
You have a distance scale in the ovf though, right? That's how I use manual focus probably at least 70% of the time with this f/l.
if i have time look through the viewfinder while i fiddle with focus i'm going to actually focus with the evf not the distance scale. i only use a distance scale for about 20% of my shooting at this focal length and when i do it's for quick shooting: where i'm prefocused and just point and shoot, often without really looking at the viewfinder or lcd.
Spyro P. wrote:
me too, but I always stop down as much as I can
most people do the opposite these days.
80% of my shooting is done with the sun below the horizon and i don't use external light or a tripod, so i'm afraid stopping down isn't really an option most of the time.
