Thread: The X100-S

Originally Posted by pdh

thanks Luke.
I'm certainly not feeling critical of Boid, by the way, for his take on this (you're not the first, Boid, to want this sort of thing! - though you have basically described an M8 ) ... it's just that if you want to use 1920s technology to focus your camera, you can already (I do sometimes, I've got a Bessa R2a after all) and you can even buy a digital camera to do it with (if you save up long enough or have deep pockets) ... but no manufacturer is at all likely to start setting up production lines to do it now from scratch, not even Fuji ... the costs would so far exceed the potential money to be made from a small number of enthusiasts as to make it prohibitive ...

Are you suggesting that there wouldn't be a market for a camera like this without AF? For me, not having AF is one of the principal reasons I'm considering buying a Leica, as I'm sure it is with a number of people. I feel it potentially could be Fuji's best selling product.

Are you asking if I prefer film or digital? Not the right person to ask I'm afraid - it's all just pictures to me.
I prefer to use the camera that I want to pick up but don't want to put down
As for price ... if you add together the cost of your X100, LX5 and DSC, plus any money you have spent on other cameras and accessories, I bet you could have afforded an RD1s or an M8 ... (so could I, but instead I bought other cameras and accessories too!)

Originally Posted by Isoterica

And I wouldn't mind one of those sweet bellows 80mm babys either!

Whatever it comes down to Boid, people will still shoot digital like they shoot digital, it won't ever be the same. Reason being, excess frames are free. The shooter has to slow down, think about what they want to convey, compose their shots, of course chimp the viewfinder to make sure they got them otherwise there is no reason to digital.. and then move on. Not fire 10-12 shots hoping to get something in the flurry. I think it is more than just the rangefinder experience though I love mine, I think its developing a waste less philosophy as well.

I agree with you Kristen. The digital world doesn't care of waste. Kai from DigitalRev has enough practice on his Leica to focus fast. DigitalRev TV - Camera Focus Test - YouTube I'd love to have the same degree of familiarity with the X100, which I really love btw. But more often than not I'm just playing catch-up to a slow AF.

Originally Posted by Boid

Are you suggesting that there wouldn't be a market for a camera like this without AF? For me, not having AF is one of the principal reasons I'm considering buying a Leica, as I'm sure it is with a number of people. I feel it potentially could be Fuji's best selling product.

I'm suggesting that there would not be a significantly large market to make it worthwhile for a manufacturer to tool up - from scratch - to make a precision mechanical device like a rangefinder.
I have no idea how many X100s, X10s and XP1s Fuji will sell (let alone all their other small-sensor compacts) but the idea that a camera without AF would outsell any of them is unlikely to be accurate. It would require tens (probably hundreds) of thousands of consumers to decide that AF was less trouble than MF ... which, lets be straight about this - it just isn't ... AF is incredibly convenient

Originally Posted by pdh

Are you asking if I prefer film or digital? Not the right person to ask I'm afraid - it's all just pictures to me.
I prefer to use the camera that I want to pick up but don't want to put down
As for price ... if you add together the cost of your X100, LX5 and DSC, plus any money you have spent on other cameras and accessories, I bet you could have afforded an RD1s or an M8 ... (so could I, but instead I bought other cameras and accessories too!)

Dang. Now you've set me thinking. I should sell off my gear. But they're not really worth much money. I was talking digital though, and how it would be nice to simplify the functions in camera, stop messing with too many options while shooting, instead concentrate of capturing enough detail to work with on post. I'll be waiting to buy the M10. In fact I'll wait a full year after it's launched to buy one, since Leica takes about that long to iron out the kinks in every camera they have released.

I would just like to know what has changed in the manufacturing process since the days of the much maligned 35mm rangefinders form the days of old. Like the Olympus trip, or the Yashicas........etc. every company it seems had one.....and they were dirt cheap. Why does it NEED to be priced like a Leica? I don't understand it.....why can't you just jam a sensor in there where the film goes? Take out the LCD screen, take out the AF mechanism and the all the technology that goes into it.

Look at the Bessa...... $700 for a beautifully made precision device. Why would making it digital triple the price? And what I'm talking about makes it cheaper..... the rangefinder can be much simpler if it needn't be planned to work with different focal lengths. Have you people seen the prices commanded the old Epson rangefinder...... epson rangefinder | eBay . I'd say there's a market for them. Buying 7-8 year old digital technology for modern day digital prices. If you make it cute, and with great optical quality, you'll get photography enthusiasts, fashionistas and hipsters all beating down your door.....as long as it's affordable.

Originally Posted by Luke

I would just like to know what has changed in the manufacturing process since the days of the much maligned 35mm rangefinders form the days of old. Like the Olympus trip, or the Yashicas........etc. every company it seems had one.....and they were dirt cheap. Why does it NEED to be priced like a Leica? I don't understand it.....why can't you just jam a sensor in there where the film goes? Take out the LCD screen, take out the AF mechanism and the all the technology that goes into it.

Look at the Bessa...... $700 for a beautifully made precision device. Why would making it digital triple the price? And what I'm talking about makes it cheaper..... the rangefinder can be much simpler if it needn't be planned to work with different focal lengths. Have you people seen the prices commanded the old Epson rangefinder...... epson rangefinder | eBay . I'd say there's a market for them. Buying 7-8 year old digital technology for modern day digital prices. If you make it cute, and with great optical quality, you'll get photography enthusiasts, fashionistas and hipsters all beating down your door.....as long as it's affordable.

I agree! We should kidnap some suits at Fuji and hold them hostage till they make this happen! But seriously, the RD-1 prices are a scandal! For a 6mp sensor! How can more camera makers not see this??

I like the way you think Boid.

Originally Posted by Boid

it would be nice to simplify the functions in camera, stop messing with too many options while shooting, instead concentrate of capturing enough detail to work
.

well, the camera doesn't force you to fiddle with it!
My E-P2 is permanently in Aperture priority; The only things I ever change are the lens (!), the ISO if it starts to get a bit dim, and the metering occasionally ... mind you most of my pictures still turn out to be snaps but I don;t think if I changed lots of camera options while I was shooting it would turn me into Kertesz ... (unfortunately)

I think the RD1 has become a bit of a chic camera amongst a certain crowd recently - the prices have doubled in the last year (I nearly bought one about this time last year is how I know) - wouldn't surprise me if there was a sudden glut of them in a few months time (with appropriately lower prices)