rattymouse wrote:
You just bought the X100 rather recently no? You couldnt bond with it? Won't you miss the amazing high ISO use?
Yeah, I've been shooting with the X100 for several months. It is a great camera, but I don't love AF and I don't love 35mm equiv. lenses, especially as my main lens. Once output to the same size, the X100's high ISO performance isn't THAT much better than the M9's, from what I can tell so far, so I'm not really losing much in that regard. I'm not a huge low light shooter, either way, and I often add grain to photos, so no biggie. In good light, the M9 is pretty incredible.
I essentially bought the X100 to try and convince myself not to buy an M9, but the two aren't really comparable, so I should have just gone straight for the M9 in the first place. Actually, used prices hadn't come down enough on the M9 when I bought the X100, so I didn't really have the option of the M9, at that point.
The X100 is plenty of camera for most uses. I just wanted a digital rangefinder and a 50mm lens. It certainly wasn't a savvy financial decision.
Once I sold my A900, because of size, I've been caught in a revolving door of gear, trying to find the right combination of size, IQ, etc. I was happy with the A900 for years, and would still be happy with its output now, if I still had the camera. The size was just a little bulky for everyday carry, and manual focusing, while good for a DSLR, still caused me some problems. The M9 fits the bill.
douglasf13 wrote:
Yeah, I've been shooting with the X100 for several months. It is a great camera, but I don't love AF and I don't love 35mm equiv. lenses, especially as my main lens. Once output to the same size, the X100's high ISO performance isn't THAT much better than the M9's, from what I can tell so far, so I'm not really losing much in that regard. I'm not a huge low light shooter, either way, and I often add grain to photos, so no biggie. In good light, the M9 is pretty incredible.
I essentially bought the X100 to try and convince myself not to buy an M9, but the two aren't really comparable, so I should have just gone straight for the M9 in the first place. Actually, used prices hadn't come down enough on the M9 when I bought the X100, so I didn't really have the option of the M9, at that point.
The X100 is plenty of camera for most uses. I just wanted a digital rangefinder and a 50mm lens. It certainly wasn't a savvy financial decision.
Once I sold my A900, because of size, I've been caught in a revolving door of gear, trying to find the right combination of size, IQ, etc. I was happy with the A900 for years, and would still be happy with its output now, if I still had the camera. The size was just a little bulky for everyday carry, and manual focusing, while good for a DSLR, still caused me some problems. The M9 fits the bill.
Yeah, I know the feeling. I bought a GA645 rangefinder, to try to stave off buying a GF670. It's over $1000 cheaper, but not the same and I still find myself wanting the GF670. So much that I think I'll end up with one eventually. They are damned overpriced here in China so that is the only thing preventing me from getting one now.
It would have been cheaper to just have bought the GF670 in the first place.
Yeah, those Fuji medium format rangefinder cameras are awesome. I would've certainly considered those if I hadn't decided to move away from film altogether.
