If you look for reviews on the X100 then you have probably come across Zack Arias's blog. He just posted up his review of the X100s for those that are interested here is the link:
Fairly humorous take on the state of the industry in his introduction. Just picked up a XE-1 and a 35 1.4. Reading this makes me think maybe the X100s is the solution for the every day camera.
it was funny until he said fuji was the new leica.
firstly, fuji is it's own great thing.
secondly, a camera that focuses itself is never going to be the new Leica. how do people not get this?
edit: btw nice shots and Im sure the camera is great. as in, I would consider buying one if I had any interest in digital imaging because it's that good.
redisburning wrote:
secondly, a camera that focuses itself is never going to be the new Leica. how do people not get this?
The Fuji does reportedly do a pretty good job with MF, so one could conceivably own one and never use AF.
Anyway, the gist of what he's saying makes sense to me. Fuji doesn't quite engender the mystique that Leica does, but at this rate perhaps someday they could.
secondly, a camera that focuses itself is never going to be the new Leica. how do people not get this?
That's far too literal a reading of what Mr. Arias said.
Fuji may well be the new Leica because they've acquired a great deal of cachet and credibility amongst photographers of all stripes. They seem to be interested in taking the best of the past and combining it with the best of the present and the future. They seem to listen to customers and take customer feedback into consideration. Their prices are reasonable and their products are strong. There are some issues, but the X series is young. Already, just two years into the series, they've made great strides.
Combining popularity with workability is what Arias is really getting at, I think. That's what Leica had. It's what Fujifilm has now.
I think it has something to do with putting their focus on the shooting experience rather than ticking boxes on a features checklist. Sure, Fuji's cameras have a lot of quirks, but they've also shown a high degree of responsiveness to customer needs... moreso than any other camera manufacturer in recent memory.
look, I didn't make that comment to be negative about the Fuji. it's not a better/worse idea.
I've tried an awful lot of cameras, and a Leica is a Leica and no other camera is it. The same can't be said for many Japanese cameras (though some, like the F, the Hexar AF, the Contax T3, etc. have their own version). A few cameras doing the same get close, notably the Zeiss Ikon and the Nikon SP, but in the end "the new Leica" is just the battle cry of the product that isn't quite good enough.
nothing about the X100s says Leica to me. it's a Fuji, like the GA645 or the lovably quirky gx680 or the panoramic cameras. but just because it's small, quiet and has good IQ doesn't make it a Leica. if that was all it took, the M-1 would have been the new Leica in 1971.
anyway I will also use this post to apologize for essentially thread-crapping. I didn't intend for my comment to derail the thread but I guess like any other time Leica is mentioned here it has to go off the rails. this time it appears to be my fault and Im sorry for taking away from what is a good real world review of a good camera that is without significant criticism from what mr. Arias says.
but just because it's small, quiet and has good IQ doesn't make it a Leica. if that was all it took, the M-1 would have been the new Leica in 1971.
Of course. That's why it's not just about any particular camera or features on a camera. It's about an innovative, risk-taking company that makes products people want and improves those products based on what its customers say. Not a lot of companies are doing that (photo and otherwise).
For some reason, the tone of this review reminds me quite a bit of a Steve Huff review. This one almost reads like it was generated by Fuji's publicity department. That said, it does appear to be an extremely nice upgrade over the X100.
Whatever happened to camera reviewers? When did they get the idea that hip lingo and snappy chat did the business? If this guy had another wit he'd be a halfwit.
Nice camera, shame about the saddlebags full of personal baggage. Then again, with a chip on each shoulder you might argue he was well-balanced.
Well... isn't he sponsored by Fuji? Didn't they send him on a big trip to India to make a promotional video/review of the X-Pro1 and X100 last year?
I don't think he's entirely in their pocket, actually. I think he's mostly shooting straight. But it's always worth at least keeping in mind where the money/goods/benefits are flowing.
Wow so much negativity to a very enjoyable read and nice angle on the different brands!
Why can't an reviewer inject enthusiasm and humour into their personalized review of a camera? Benchmarks and straight up test results abound already such as DP Review and DxOMark.
Just saying...
Message edited as I used the word "interviewer" by accident instead of "reviewer".
Siddhu wrote:
Wow so much negativity to a very enjoyable read and nice angle on the different brands!
Why can't an interviewer inject enthusiasm and humour into their personalized review of a camera? Benchmarks and straight up test results abound already such as DP Review and DxOMark.
Just saying...
Who is being interviewed? Maybe I missed something.
Well, for me it's the ridiculous, over-the-top anthropomorphism of corporations.
...or the use of language mentioned above by Philip that caused me to "throw up a little in my mouth" to continue the dribble.
"Leaf shutter lens y’all", right!
...or perhaps, that someone who says he just started his street shooting with the not-so-old X100 is declaring that Fuji is the new Leica (and that's not to take anything away from his images which are very nice. Just that, if he does not have a lot of previous rangefinder shooting under his belt, that's a bold/ uneducated and loaded statement to make!).
Anyway, as a "review", it just reeks of one sided, poorly written, dogmatic bias *#*#!!
But that's just me. ...and I was planning to buy an X100s but this stuff really makes me question that!
So, Ι know I said I wouldn't buy one but today I did
I was out looking for the 14/2.8 and the only shop that had both this and the x100s was one of the smaller shops in melbourne, so I asked the price out of curiocity (and having just checked online: $1,460) but for some bizarre reason the guy said $1,230
and then decided to give me a 10% discount on that, so $1,100
how do you say no to that your honor
took a walk with it in the city and yeah the camera is better than the x100 in every area that matters, AF, MF, EVF, IQ, write speed (I think).
Here's a photo
I used it with LR4.4 and I noticed that the dngs, to my eyes, are clearly sharpened. I gave it a slight touch of clarity/sharpening in LR (it looked like it could use it) and it started introducing a little bit of that watercolouring thing which you might be a able to notice on the crop above. But I really feel I'm splitting hairs here, these files are so big that I'm pretty sure it would be impossible to see even in 1m prints
The camera is good, I agree with Arias it's probably the best Fuji X at the moment
PS Points to fuji for changing the MF switch and putting MF and AF-S at the two ends, makes it much easier to switch between the two (who the hell uses AF-C with this camera ).
Spyro P. wrote:
I used it with LR4.4 and I noticed that the dngs, to my eyes, are clearly sharpened. I gave it a slight touch of clarity/sharpening in LR (it looked like it could use it) and it started introducing a little bit of that watercolouring thing which you might be a able to notice on the crop above. But I really feel I'm splitting hairs here, these files are so big that I'm pretty sure it would be impossible to see even in 1m prints
The camera is good, I agree with Arias it's probably the best Fuji X at the moment ...Show more →
That's a really amazing price you received. Congrats.
I really have not seen the watercolor effect anywhere near what it used to be with the most recent ACR so I'm surprised it showed up here a little at native size (I have only really seen it in huge enlargements).
check out the guys hair... that's pretty much the extend of it.
An almost imperceptible funkiness, but you reeeeeeealy have to look for it to notice it, or print something beyond native size, or do some awkward processing.
