Fuji X100 preview at dPreview

[jonoslack]

Still don't want one - but it does look very desirable!

Fuji X100 Preview

[Terry]

Looking good but seems like there are a lot of loose ends to sort out in the short time between now and March. Hopefully it won't be released before being fully baked.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

Looking good but seems like there are a lot of loose ends to sort out in the short time between now and March. Hopefully it won't be released before being fully baked.

Hi Terry
I guess they will have had to give dpreview something 'stable' if unfinished, so they may already be way ahead of this stage.

[peterb]

Yes, it's a very nice 'box' (nearly the size and feel, perhaps, of an M9) but what remains to be seen are the quality of the optic (it's bokeh possibilities they allured to as well as it's resistance to flare, ghosting, CA's and other artifacts), resolution of the sensor and the quality/noise of the final image either through it's own internal processing or in post through software like LR3.X.

Still it's curious that Fuji hasn't revealed the sensor's length/width pixel dimensions. Surely they have to know by now. The current claim of 12.3 million pixels would suggest a sensor akin to Nikon's D300S or Sony's A500 both of which have dimensions of 4272 x 2848...also suggesting that Sony which makes the chips for BOTH cameras cut a deal with Fuji to supply some spares they may have had lying around from over production, perhaps. : ) But regardless...the sensor used in the D300s was no slouch. And would allow for a very nice image from this camera that offers so much potential.

[TRSmith]

Looks like a sure winner to me. If the image quality is on par with the cameras it was being compared to, I think it will quickly move to the top ranks of its class. I am especially excited by the viewfinder arrangement and predict it will be a trendsetter in that regard with other companies scrambling to come up with their own version of that feature. Kudos to Fuji!

[Terry]

I found a thread with this link to sample shots....looks good compared to D7000 - looking at the circuit board shots.

http://www.akam.no/artikler/fujifilm_x100/80789/2

[peterb]

The hybrid finder is nothing short of brilliant (literally). That said, the review mentioned the view has .5x magnification of the scene (with the framelines having 90% accuracy). Leica M's have been around .58x at the smallest (to accommodate their wider lenses at the time without needing an external VF) but typically around .68x and .72x. Doesn't that suggest the x100 may be a somewhat 'peephole' experience?

[ptomsu]

Interesting new ideas as we all know.

I first would need one in my hans for at least a few hours before i could say something. Not sure if the HVF comes up to known standards in real life - for me this would be the most important question.

And I still find the fixed lens approach very limiting .....

[peterb]

Thanks to Terry's website I can confirm that the sensor size is 4288 x 2848 (which is EXACTLY the same size as the Nikon D300S/Sony A500 sensor!). I downloaded the jpegs from the site and when I checked the image size (and a little calculator I created on a spread sheet to check it) it was confirmed. Now on their special microsite, Fuji claims that the sensor is 'specially made' for them. That may be true if they've created a 'custom' microlense' array over the pixels to compliment their lens. If that is the case then it could be a rather interesting camera to behold. And if Fuji's new EXR processing engine can keep noise and other artifacts at bay, then despite the sensor's rather smallish resolution (vs what's now becoming typical) with a 3.3 Mp/cm2 density and good noise control substantially sized images of decent pixel-peeping quality may be possible.

[jonoslack]

I'm sure it'll be lovely, and it obviously has some advantages over the X1 (although perhaps not the lens).

My problem with it is that it's a 12mp camera with an AA filter . . . . that is SO last decade

[peterb]

LOL Jono, you're very right. But while 12.3 MP is SOOOO last decade it still isn't THAT bad.

With a custom (mild) AA filter and microlens array and a good processing engine (that Fuji is purportedly developing) the X100 could serve as a good walk around camera for Bresson-like reportage that's far less expensive than an M9 with a 35mm Summicron.

And as long as you're not typically making 20 x 30 prints of every shot you take but maybe the occasional 13 x 19 you should be able to make decent sized prints of very high quality that would look well even in a gallery.

My concern is the rather smallish VF magnification with it's projected frame lines (despite the brilliant hybridization concept) that might diminish the picture taking experience somewhat to what one might see in a glorified Canon G11/G12 were it to employ the same hybrid technology. (Although at .50x magnification showing the X100's 23mm (35mm equiv.) frame lines it might be the same as an M9's .68x/.72x VF magnification experience displaying its 50mm frame lines.)

[clay stewart]

The rumor site says that Fuji is getting help from Oly and or Panasonic on this, since Fuji was part of the original 4/3 consortium. If this is the case, then perhaps there is a similar model in progress from Panasonic or Oly.

That would be interesting, as I think I would prefer the ability to change lenses, although, in a pinch, I could make do with a 35 mm I suppose.

I do like the way Fuji minimized the protrusion on the back of the viewfinder, (still not as flush as a Leica rangefinder) as that's one of the things I dislike with Panasonic's current EVF. I always worry about tearing it off, while wearing it on a camera strap.

[m3photo]

Originally Posted by clay stewart

I do like the way Fuji minimized the protrusion on the back of the viewfinder, (still not as flush as a Leica rangefinder) as that's one of the things I dislike with Panasonic's current EVF. I always worry about tearing it off, while wearing it on a camera strap.

On the other hand ...

"Some camera designers, wisely, move the eyepiece out away from the body a bit so that it can meet the eye more easily. "

Excerpt from: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ve_noses.shtml

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by m3photo

On the other hand ...

"Some camera designers, wisely, move the eyepiece out away from the body a bit so that it can meet the eye more easily. "

Excerpt from: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...ve_noses.shtml

True, although the VF on the X100 is on the left side of the body, so, if you're right eyed, the nose will probably be out of the way on the side of the camera.

[scho]

Originally Posted by peterb

LOL Jono, you're very right. But while 12.3 MP is SOOOO last decade it still isn't THAT bad.

With a custom (mild) AA filter and microlens array and a good processing engine (that Fuji is purportedly developing) the X100 could serve as a good walk around camera for Bresson-like reportage that's far less expensive than an M9 with a 35mm Summicron.

And as long as you're not typically making 20 x 30 prints of every shot you take but maybe the occasional 13 x 19 you should be able to make decent sized prints of very high quality that would look well even in a gallery.

My concern is the rather smallish VF magnification with it's projected frame lines (despite the brilliant hybridization concept) that might diminish the picture taking experience somewhat to what one might see in a glorified Canon G11/G12 were it to employ the same hybrid technology. (Although at .50x magnification showing the X100's 23mm (35mm equiv.) frame lines it might be the same as an M9's .68x/.72x VF magnification experience displaying its 50mm frame lines.)

They should have let Zeiss design the finder for them. Nothing better than the Zeiss Ikon RF finder.

[peterb]

Originally Posted by scho

They should have let Zeiss design the finder for them. Nothing better than the Zeiss Ikon RF finder.

::::slapping side of head:::::: Now THAT would be something!

[Anders_HK]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

My problem with it is that it's a 12mp camera with an AA filter . . . . that is SO last decade

Indeed!

If in fact it is a Nikon sensor i think disappointing considering that Fuji has claimed custom made (micro lenses do not qualify suchs tatement). Likewise disappointing considering Fuji's history of sensors from S2, S3, S5 and the high DR capabilites also of smaller cameras. If indeed they buy sensor from someone why not from Kodak or Dalsa or have it custom made from them? Likewise of the lens, why not a Zeiss, Scheider or Rodenstock?

Regards
Anders

[tom in mpls]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

I found a thread with this link to sample shots....looks good compared to D7000 - looking at the circuit board shots.

http://www.akam.no/artikler/fujifilm_x100/80789/2

Great to see some samples. The high ISO looks better than the Nikon. And I am very interested to see what it does with bokeh; only 2 of the shots are of use in that area, but the bokeh looks pleasing to my eye.

So far my hopes remain high.

[hot]

photos were removed

After request from Fujifilm Norway, we have agreed
to remove the sample pictures from the site.

[Anders_HK]

Originally Posted by hot

photos were removed

After request from Fujifilm Norway, we have agreed
to remove the sample pictures from the site.

2nd paragraph of http://www.akam.no/artikler/fujifilm_x100/80789/2 ;

"Vanligvis når det er preproduksjonsmodeller vi har på testbenken, er bildekvaliteten en av de tingene vi ikke kan se så nøye på, fordi slike modeller er langt fra kalibrert og optimalisert. I mange tilfeller er det også en betingelse for å få låne kameraet at vi ikke vurderer bildekvaliteten. Noen slike restriksjoner har ikke Fujifilm gitt oss, så bildekvaliteten må vi se nærmere på..."

Being Swedish and with very similar language to Norwegian, this translates to:

"Usually for preproduction models that we have on the test bench, the image quality is one of the things we cannot look at so carefully, because such models are far from calibrated and optimized. In many cases it is the situation that in order to get to borrow the camera that we do not examine the image quality. Fujifilm has not given us any such restrictions, so we will look closer at the image quality..."

---

In other words the removal of the images are complete load of pure B.S.

Anyone else really tired of this camera???

Dear Fuji, you shot yourself in the foot. I will stick to my Leaf Aptus and iPhone. Thank you.

Regards
Anders

[Terry]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

2nd paragraph of http://www.akam.no/artikler/fujifilm_x100/80789/2 ;



In other words the removal of the images are complete load of pure B.S.

Or Fuji didn't say it and found they were published asked for the shots to be taken down. I was quite surprised that they were posted in the first place.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

Indeed!

If in fact it is a Nikon sensor i think disappointing considering that Fuji has claimed custom made (micro lenses do not qualify suchs tatement). Likewise disappointing considering Fuji's history of sensors from S2, S3, S5 and the high DR capabilites also of smaller cameras. If indeed they buy sensor from someone why not from Kodak or Dalsa or have it custom made from them? Likewise of the lens, why not a Zeiss, Scheider or Rodenstock?

Regards
Anders

Why? No one makes sensors better than Sony, and Fuji high-end optics are world class. In fact, Fuji makes Hasselblad H lenses.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Why? No one makes sensors better than Sony, and Fuji high-end optics are world class. In fact, Fuji makes Hasselblad H lenses.

Whilst I quite agree with you - if they are going to use a Sony sensor (fine by me) it's a pity they've apparently used an old one, and not the new sensor fitted to the A55 and the K5 with it's spectacular high ISO and dynamic range (and 16mps).

[douglasf13]

I agree, Jono. Heck, they could've at least gone for the 14mp Sony sensor. I wonder what the cost difference between the 12, 14 and 16mp sensors are to the manufacturers?

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

I agree, Jono. Heck, they could've at least gone for the 14mp Sony sensor. I wonder what the cost difference between the 12, 14 and 16mp sensors are to the manufacturers?

One of the issues I never understood - building a camera from scratch today and not going for the latest technology available is kind of odd .....

[tom in mpls]

The issue may be the need to design and manufacture the custom microlens array; it may not be a simple matter to drop in just any sensor. None the less, I, too, am disappointed that it doesn't have the Sony 16mp.

[douglasf13]

I think you're right about the timeframe, Tom.

As a quick side note, actual resolution differences may be more academic than real in practice. Iliah Borg posted some pretty interesting insights recently in regards to the actual differences of resolutions, handheld and on tripods and vices. If you're not using a tripod, it may not matter for final output whether it is a 12 or 16 mp sensor (in regards to resolution.)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=37552546

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by peterb

The hybrid finder is nothing short of brilliant (literally). That said, the review mentioned the view has .5x magnification of the scene (with the framelines having 90% accuracy). Leica M's have been around .58x at the smallest (to accommodate their wider lenses at the time without needing an external VF) but typically around .68x and .72x. Doesn't that suggest the x100 may be a somewhat 'peephole' experience?

Here is a cool little video through the X100 VF.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOhR2...layer_embedded

[tom in mpls]

Cool video indeed! I like what I see. The data, focus boxes, etc look wonderfully clear. Is the technology similar to "heads up" displays for cars etc?

[Godfrey]

Originally Posted by tom in mpls

The issue may be the need to design and manufacture the custom microlens array; it may not be a simple matter to drop in just any sensor. None the less, I, too, am disappointed that it doesn't have the Sony 16mp.

Between 12 and 16 Mpixel on this size sensor, all else being equal, amounts to about a 2-3 LP@mm resolution difference. I won't sweat it.

[Anders_HK]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

Why? No one makes sensors better than Sony, and Fuji high-end optics are world class. In fact, Fuji makes Hasselblad H lenses.

Ehhh...

Sensors: Dalsa and Kodak makes highest quality. Used in MFDB + Leica M8 & M9. If Fuji is smart they base on sensor technology they have developed themselves, such as furthering the old honeycomb concept or other sensor technology for high dynamic range. At least in my book that would be more interesting...

Lenses: Correct Fuji makes Hasselblad H lenses, but Zeiss Hasselblad V lenses. Elsewhere has been discussed issue of Hassy ditch Zeiss and recreate line for H with Fuji.
Which ones better? There is a certain character in quality of German glass not available from other fabricators: read Zeiss, Schneider and Rodenstock and these companies are arguably capable of the very best.

Above two are most important for image quality, more so than any gadgets they build in...

Back to my Leaf Aptus and iPhone ...

[Terry]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

Ehhh...

Sensors: Dalsa and Kodak makes highest quality. Used in MFDB + Leica M8 & M9. If Fuji is smart they base on sensor technology they have developed themselves, such as furthering the old honeycomb concept or other sensor technology for high dynamic range. At least in my book that would be more interesting...

The first MF back that even remotely has live view was announced this week. The refresh rate of the image will be only 3x per second. The Panny m4/3 are more than 60x per second. The M8 again a CCD with no live view.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

Ehhh...

Sensors: Dalsa and Kodak makes highest quality. Used in MFDB + Leica M8 & M9. If Fuji is smart they base on sensor technology they have developed themselves, such as furthering the old honeycomb concept or other sensor technology for high dynamic range. At least in my book that would be more interesting...

Lenses: Correct Fuji makes Hasselblad H lenses, but Zeiss Hasselblad V lenses. Elsewhere has been discussed issue of Hassy ditch Zeiss and recreate line for H with Fuji.
Which ones better? There is a certain character in quality of German glass not available from other fabricators: read Zeiss, Schneider and Rodenstock and these companies are arguably capable of the very best.

Above two are most important for image quality, more so than any gadgets they build in...

Back to my Leaf Aptus and iPhone ...

We can certainly discuss different "looks," and I've generally shot Zeiss on both my Hasselblads and DSLRs, but I certainly think Fuji is a high end competitor to the German lens makers.

As for sensors, you've got it a bit backwards. Technology moves upstream with camera sensors, and, actually, some P&S sensors have the best per pixel quality of all. MFDB sensors are considerably behind current aps-c sensors in technology, and MFDB's performance advantage is dependent on superior supporting electronics and physical size, not the sensor design itself. If Sony made a 645 sized Exmor and yanked the AA filter off, I think Dalsa and Kodak MFDB sensor production would be in big trouble. Sony's CFA is competitive with MFDB, too.

p.s. I've owned Leaf mfdb, 35mm and aps-c digital cameras, so I'm not playing sides.

[Anders_HK]

@ Terry, live view does not equal image quality

Originally Posted by douglasf13

We can certainly discuss different "looks," and I've generally shot Zeiss on both my Hasselblads and DSLRs, but I certainly think Fuji is a high end competitor to the German lens makers.

Fuji is of course capable of quality glass, but in general terms Zeiss, Schneider and Rodenstock are higher yet. I guess they do not wish to put those on a Fuji ...

Originally Posted by douglasf13

... some P&S sensors have the best per pixel quality of all. MFDB sensors are considerably behind current aps-c sensors in technology...

Incorrect if we speak of best possible image quality. The sensors capable of highest image quality today are those by Dalsa and second by Kodak. Else Leaf, Phase One and Hassy would contract Sony, Canon or Nikon! However, highest image quality is at low ISO. If we speak of capability at high ISO it takes a different sensor design. Regarding such also Kodak make sensors with base ISO of 200...

Originally Posted by douglasf13

If Sony made a 645 sized Exmor and yanked the AA filter off, I think Dalsa and Kodak MFDB sensor production would be in big trouble. Sony's CFA is competitive with MFDB, too.

It takes more. I think they would be no more worried than of Pentax 645D, of which they are not. Rather I believe Canon and Nikon are

Originally Posted by douglasf13

p.s. I've owned Leaf mfdb, 35mm and aps-c digital cameras, so I'm not playing sides.

Then you should like me know . I have owned more. The interesting would as I indicated in post above be if they would use a Fuji designed sensor, which was what they had indicated by "custom designed". However, though not confirmed by Fuji it sounds as if sensor instead is a Sony, which does not match what they had stated. Fuji is capable of sensors as they showed with their S2, S3 and S5 dslrs, and... that patent they filed years back of a new Foveon type technology...

... back to reading of Leaf and iPhone and the new IQ backs...

Regards
Anders

[douglasf13]

Sorry, Anders, but you're simply wrong about sensors (I'll leave the Fuji lens debate alone.) You are confusing overall output with base sensor quality, and that is the point I'm trying to make. The sensors in MFDB and the M8/M9 are rather outdated technology, but the systems as a whole output great files, because of the reasons I mentioned earlier. Joakim over on Fred Miranda, who actually works in the field, speaks to this a lot, and I'm sure you could ask him specifics in this regard. Here is one of his many posts, this one about the M9: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/893332/8#8504636

There isn't anything magical about Leica M and MFDB sensors, but size and excellent supporting hardware (and, arguably, no AA filter) goes a long way. The reason they aren't contracting someone like Sony to make more modern, large sensors comes down to scaling costs (Pentax 645D uses a Kodak sensor, too.) Sony probably doesn't see it as economical.

It is interesting that Fuji didn't try their own design, like from the S5, but it really signals how good Sony aps-c sensors have become over the last couple of years. The new 16mp version has outrageous base ISO DR for an aps-c sensor: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/fo...?topic=49200.0

[Anders_HK]

Douglas,

The sensors in M8, M9 per what I understand indeed are built on old sensor design and that originally for M8. The newer generation sensors in Leaf and Phase One backs (latest are 80MP sensors) are new designs (fabricated by Dalsa) to achieve the best image quality possible at 80MP today. The fact that they use CCD does in itself not mean outdated technology, it is matter of choice (those who prefer high ISO disagree). I do believe Dalsa and Kodak are capable of higher quality sensors than Sony, but we can disagree. On other hand I believe we agree that the final output is what counts. Above as concerning X100 is slight .

I did miss out using the old honecomb sensor... pity if they not use a Fuji sensor ...

Regards
Anders

[lambert]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

...

It is interesting that Fuji didn't try their own design, like from the S5, but it really signals how good Sony aps-c sensors have become over the last couple of years. The new 16mp version has outrageous base ISO DR for an aps-c sensor: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/fo...?topic=49200.0

It's disappointing that Fuji did not go with Sony's latest 16mp sensor as used in the K5 & D7000, instead of the 2 or 3 year old 12mp sensor.

[Terry]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

@ Terry, live view does not equal image quality

Regards
Anders

I never equated the two.

However, in this case, live view is an integral part of the camera design.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by lambert

It's disappointing that Fuji did not go with Sony's latest 16mp sensor as used in the K5 & D7000, instead of the 2 or 3 year old 12mp sensor.

Agreed, although as Tom mentioned, I'm betting it has to do with development time for the special offset microlenses. Who knows?

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

@ Terry, live view does not equal image quality

HI Anders
perhaps it does in your case?
All the sensors you 'like' seem to be CCD, which fundamentally excludes live view.

@Douglas
Those articles are interesting - I noted the idea that a FF version of the K5 sensor would be 38mp with a 12 stop dynamic range - an attractive proposition for the A900 replacement I'd say!

[douglasf13]

Yeah, the next round of 35mm sensors should be outstanding, judging by the K5/D7000/A580.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

Douglas,

The sensors in M8, M9 per what I understand indeed are built on old sensor design and that originally for M8. The newer generation sensors in Leaf and Phase One backs (latest are 80MP sensors) are new designs (fabricated by Dalsa) to achieve the best image quality possible at 80MP today. The fact that they use CCD does in itself not mean outdated technology, it is matter of choice (those who prefer high ISO disagree). I do believe Dalsa and Kodak are capable of higher quality sensors than Sony, but we can disagree. On other hand I believe we agree that the final output is what counts. Above as concerning X100 is slight .

I did miss out using the old honecomb sensor... pity if they not use a Fuji sensor ...

Regards
Anders

Not to beat a dead horse too much , and at the risk of staying off topic, I emailed Joakim about the quality of the Dalsa sensors, as much that I have read was in regards to the Kodak sensors, and he was kind enough to give me permission to post his email:



"[In comparison to Sony Exmor CMOS sensors,] the single biggest difference (when compared to the latest generation of Dalsas (P65, HB60, Leaf80, PO80) is really the total QE (up to ~50% in the best Nikon incarnations, about 30% in most larger format sensors) - and increased sensitivity to light at lower incident angles. Most MF systems do not carry non-retrofocus lenses or lenses faster than F2.8, so that's of a lesser importance too...

The M8 and M9 designs should not be likened to those sensors, they're at least four-five years older in design and performance. Eight years in the M8 case.

What you WOULD gain [with EXMOR] is high ISO capabilities and readout speeds (at least doubling of the fps), and actually I think that those are not really the main PoS arguments on MF backs... But the ISO400 performance would be half the losses when compared to the very best current MFDB - maybe this would be important?

I don't know if Sony can stitch their latest 4.8µm cells - sofar we've only seen single-sweep sensors from that generation. I'd think we get a good indication of that when the next high-MP Nikon FX gets public.

But yes, the short answer is that the very best MFDB sensors today perform on par with APS size cameras of the D90-generation - at best.

Also, the D7000 resolution would give 95MP on the 54x40mm format, and the 7D/60D resolution would give almost 120MP on the same format.

The D7000 has 2.1Ge- per mm2 at ISO100, and the Dalsa 6µm cell has around 1.2Ge- per mm2 and twice the readout noise. This would make the [D7000] ISO200 performance almost exactly the same as the current [Dalsa] ISO100 performance, and the [D7000] ISO100 performance about the same as the [Dalsa] ISO50 performance." - Joakim




So, I still contend that there is no reason why Fuji would consider using Dalsa (or Kodak) for their APS-C camera. MFDB isn't about sensor quality itself at the pixel level, but, rather, taking advantage of nice, large sensors.

[Anders_HK]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

So, I still contend that there is no reason why Fuji would consider using Dalsa (or Kodak) for their APS-C camera. MFDB isn't about sensor quality itself at the pixel level, but, rather, taking advantage of nice, large sensors.

Well, I could stay quiet (though you quoted my post)... or... simply state that our opinions differ and I politely do not wish waste time do dig and dig. Is it not so that whenever discussions relating to demonstrate or justify dslrs or dslr sensors should equal or better mfdb ones that discussion is dragged deeper and deepr into scientific details to justify and prove one tireless point?? That is pointless. I can say again that I prefer sensors from Dalsa and Kodak and that thus my opinion is that they are the top, but also the Fuji ones seem interesting because of their hdr capacity and the old patent on Foveon type. Seems what you quoted is focus on noise? MF sensors are not aimed at high ISO but ultimate image quality. That does not mean that Dalsa and Kodak are capable of only one sensor, does it??

Back to X100. It would be sweet if the reason Fuji pulled the images from Norweigan article turned out to be because actual launch of sensor to be used is a different and something very new, after all they stated 'custom made' was it?... but perhaps not...

Seems though... X100 is already feels tad old prior released ...

Regards
Anders

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

Seems though... X100 is already feels tad old prior released ...

Regards
Anders

I fear that it does . . . incidentally, I rather agree about Kodak and Dalsa sensors . . . but I can't see how you could possibly have incorporated a CCD (rather than a CMOS) into a camera where live view is unquestionably the main point, and where contrast detect focusing is going to be the main method.

all the best

[Godfrey]

Originally Posted by Anders_HK

...
Seems though... X100 is already feels tad old prior released

You folks are just accelerating the usual cycle of Magpie Syndrome to new heights. It used to be:

- get excited about shiny new thing
- read all about and anticipate shiny new thing
- buy shiny new thing
- let buyer's remorse dash all hope and expectation from the universe
- get rid of the piece of junk
- "Oh look, there's another shiny new thing..."

Now you get to buyer's remorse before you even buy the object of your infatuation.

This is good at least in that you might spend less money. However, I bet a good number of you buy it anyway... ;-)

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by Godfrey

This is good at least in that you might spend less money. However, I bet a good number of you buy it anyway... ;-)

Probably . . .
You're a fine one to talk with your shiny new E5 (I think you were the first person in the world to get one!).

. . . . . and so am I with my shiny new K5, although my credentials are nothing like as good as yours

[Godfrey]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

Probably . . .
You're a fine one to talk with your shiny new E5 (I think you were the first person in the world to get one!).

. . . . . and so am I with my shiny new K5, although my credentials are nothing like as good as yours

Yeah ... I bought the first new camera I'd purchased since December 2008 after planning to buy its predecessor for three years. I just keep buying equipment willy nilly, helter-skelter.

I'm your model GetDPI photo equipment geek.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by Godfrey

Yeah ... I bought the first new camera I'd purchased since December 2008 after planning to buy its predecessor for three years. I just keep buying equipment willy nilly, helter-skelter.

I'm your model GetDPI photo equipment geek.

That's the one Godfrey!
The profligate we all know and love!

But will you buy an X100?

[Braeside]

Regarding liveview and CCD sensors, don't Panasonic use CCDs in a lot of their bridge and super compacts and they all have liveview and HD video?

Sorry we seem to be getting a bit off topic again.

Would love a future X10x with interchangeable lenses, let's hope Fuji are thinking along those lines.

[Godfrey]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

That's the one Godfrey!
The profligate we all know and love!

But will you buy an X100?

At your service.

I don't know yet whether I'll buy an X100. I will likely wait until it's out, I have tested it, and Lightroom supports it before making a decision. It would suit certain kinds of photography I like to do well, whether better than the E-5 ... or better than an E-PL2 two lens kit ... I can't answer yet.

I might not buy anything at all in the near future as I'm pretty happy with the kit I have now. Sold the G1, sold the L1 as I am no longer user them. I'm reducing the equipment distraction. If an X100 or any other compact serves the right purpose and reduces the equipment distraction, it has a chance.