millsart wrote:
If they made 85% frame lines but then having the total VF area larger, that would be pretty annoying.
Its bad enough shooting a RF where the frame lines aren't precise because they are set at a given focal distance, say 1 meter, such as the M8, but man, having only 85% really waste a lot.
I do love being able to see whats outside the frame, but if they wanted to use framelines such of made the VF 115% total view and then gave 100% framelines at 2meters
Certainly you can mentally try to think whats outside the framelines and compose but with a zoom thats going to be more challenging and still not exact.
I've had some 95% midlevel DSLR's which I could live with, but 85% is pushing things, at least if you like to carefully compose what you leave in and out of your frame at the time of shooting
The x100 has an OVF accuracy spec of only 90% itself with the total viewfinder area being larger, and that's even with parallax correction at various distances. I can't find the spec. for the M8 or M9 but I bet it's not much better. I think it's just the nature of the beast and one eventually gets used to what to expect at various distances as you say. At least you get more than what is indicated rather than less. For 100% accuracy, a TTL system is required - SLR or EVF (which of course the x100 also offers). Good point about this being an issue with the zoom.
sebboh wrote:
really? i barely noticed. i need to spend less time looking through film cameras, it just depresses me when i look through a dslr viewfinder.
Yeah, just glass and mirrors (Nikon F2), through a Zeiss lens. I don't even need to push the shutter release.
Daan B wrote:
Much too expensive for what it is. Because it is just another tiny sensor P&S.
If it were roughly the cost of the LX-5 and GF12 and XZ-1, I think it'd be a strong contender in that market for the build quality and faster lens (though not as wide as the LX-5)-: and marginally bigger sensor.
Adorama's price is list price, so I'm still hoping it's going to be closer to the LX-5 range. I've been looking at the LX-5 and thinking the X-10 would be a better choice for the faster lens and Fuji's fill flash technology (it's replacing an old F30 that went swimming by accident)...
To me, these are a tad soft though most are shot near wide open and the lowest ooc jpeg sharpening was used. What really looks impressive though is the color and tonality. In that respect, the images look much better than anything I have seen from a small sensor camera.
i prefer the manual zoom vs the motor driven type (i still have my minolta Dimage A1) and i actually do use the optical viewfinder too. i find this more asthetically pleasing in use at times. now i did say "looks" and my attitude (for or against) towards it may change when i get to handle it at the photo show in nyc on the 27th of this month.
yes it would be nice to have a 24 at the bottom end but i have a G12 and 28 is where i am at
200mm i really don't need on this type of camera too.
i am also hoping that it has a less then soap on a rope feel as does the XZ1
more tactile controls to work with rather then tripping through the cascading menu system for some of the more used.
i'll pay the extra $100 if the functionality i want and like is there.
Soap on a rope is a good way to put it. The s100 looks like it might feel the same way. I think of the compacts, the lx5 looks the best right now in terms of ergos.
I don't know, it still looks pretty good to me. I am a sucker for retro looks though.
If it had been 24-90mm /2-2.8 it would have been even more appealing but 28mm works for me.
My first choice would be a 21-85mm 2/2.8 but that will be the day I guess.
I could still picture this X10 dangling in my man purse.
