PDA

View Full Version : Fuji FinePix X100



photoSmart42
19th September 2010, 13:43
Now this looks interesting:

http://dpreview.com/news/1009/10091910fujifilmx100.asp

Wish it came with interchangeable lenses, but otherwise it's pretty much perfect (if the IQ is there). An M9 without the price tag perhaps?

mathomas
19th September 2010, 14:19
I agree. It's a very interesting release.

FYI: Also being discussed over here: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19614

Cindy Flood
19th September 2010, 15:13
I wish it had interchangeable lenses. The design is beautiful with the simple controls. They are getting closer to the camera that I want.

peterb
19th September 2010, 18:23
If you didn't the Leica X1 because you thought it was just a little shy of what it could of been you may have been given a second chance. ;)

Diane B
19th September 2010, 18:38
I wish it had interchangeable lenses. The design is beautiful with the simple controls. They are getting closer to the camera that I want.

That's exactly what I thought as I read it. I was really excited until I got to the fixed lens....

Godfrey
19th September 2010, 19:23
I disagree on the fixed vs interchangeable lens business. Frankly, DSLRs and Micro-FourThirds type cameras do that well enough to satisfy my need for it. When I need interchangeable lenses, I'm happy to carry one of them around.

In a camera of this type, a fast, wide-normal lens and excellent controls coupled with excellent responsiveness, image quality, and the right degree of compactness are all that matters to me.

I think Fuji is to be applauded for this design. If its responsiveness is up to expectations (I doubt there will be any real difficulties with controls, lens or image quality ...!), it will be a delight. :-)

Maggie O
19th September 2010, 19:58
That's exactly what I thought as I read it. I was really excited until I got to the fixed lens....

If you want an APS-ish interchangeable lens body, with a great optical VF, that camera has already been made:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4050/4239057737_1ffb2f26a1_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4239057737/)
Leica M8 and 1959 50mm f/1.4 Summilux January, 2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4239057737/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

If the Fuji is even close to being as good as it looks, I will have one!

Steen
19th September 2010, 23:39
I'm with Cindy and Diane on this.
At first glance it looked very interesting.
But the lack of interchangeable lenses makes it of no interest for me.

Tim
20th September 2010, 01:29
I disagree on the fixed vs interchangeable lens business. Frankly, DSLRs and Micro-FourThirds type cameras do that well enough to satisfy my need for it. When I need interchangeable lenses, I'm happy to carry one of them around.

In a camera of this type, a fast, wide-normal lens and excellent controls coupled with excellent responsiveness, image quality, and the right degree of compactness are all that matters to me.

I think Fuji is to be applauded for this design. If its responsiveness is up to expectations (I doubt there will be any real difficulties with controls, lens or image quality ...!), it will be a delight. :-)

I agree with Godfrey on this, I'd bet nearly everyone that buys a X100 will own other cameras, they will have other interchangable cameras in their stable.

If you read about the "decisive moment" camera, this is very much what has been asked for. Only time will tell if the IQ and handling are there. I could easily take this kind of camera on holidays as my only camera.

woodmancy
20th September 2010, 03:10
I agree with Godfrey and Tim on this one.

This combined EVF and OVF has been nirvana for the rangefinder people amongst us for over a decade. Clip on EVFs add a lot of size and weight. I can do bokehgraphy with this camera, now that I am able to see the bokeh. And this functionality is packed into an efficient and beautiful body. I wonder how much it will cost :rolleyes:

Keith

Vivek
20th September 2010, 03:18
Samsung NX10, SonyNEX5 (both with kit pancake lenses) cost around $650 ish.

Despite the fixed lens, add a ~$100 premium for the metal stuff and the simplicity.

US $800/- or less and I am sold.

iiiNelson
20th September 2010, 04:02
I agree with Vivek. Price will determine the greater success of this. My largest issue with the X1 is the price v. the versatility. $2000 gets you a lot of cameras that are much more versatile. They may not be Leica's but I don't find the output of the X1 being any better than Micro 4/3 in reality from samples I've seen.

If this camera goes for over $1000 it will mostly likely be a commercial failure but for $600-850 I'm in personally.

iiiNelson
20th September 2010, 04:30
I'm also with Cindy, Diane, and Steen on the fact that if this were a system camera I would be much more "sold" on it. I'm still searching for the "perfect" EVIL/ Compact Digital system. Micro 4/3 comes the closet overall but obviously there's room for improvement. NEX has potential with the size and sensor but the menu system doesn't work as well as dedicated dials. We also need a E-mount roadmap. The rumored Leica Full Frame EVIL would be nice hypothetically... M9 is great but not an EVIL. I'd feel weird carrying upwards of 15K in camera equipment with me too...

mathomas
20th September 2010, 04:48
Bit and pieces I'm seeing around the web (FWIW) seem to lean toward the mid-teens, say $1500+/-. Not cheap, but cheaper than the X1 (but without the Leica brand, of course).

Vivek
20th September 2010, 04:53
$1500/- would make the X1 attractive since the X1 comes with a LR bundle and the Leica stamp.

mathomas
20th September 2010, 05:08
If this camera hits the market in the mid-teens with all its features intact, good fast AF (with a good manual option), and with great IQ, I'd buy it over the X1, and I'm a total Leica fanboy.

(but I'm a long-time Aperture user, so the LR gimme with the X1 isn't worth much to me)

Vivek
20th September 2010, 05:26
Well, the price would certainly clarify who the potential buyers would be.:)

Geoff
20th September 2010, 12:40
Fixed lens might also mean no dust bunnies.

(well you could leave a removable lens on, but who does that in reality?)

Tim
20th September 2010, 12:56
$1500/- would make the X1 attractive since the X1 comes with a LR bundle and the Leica stamp.

Even if the X1 bundle comes with LR the Fuji still makes the X1 look way overpriced considering that Fuji viewfinder thats included in the price, AND great tech to boot. IF the Fuji has good or great fast accurate AF and a great lens the X1 won't even be in the race. The Leica stamp mean zero to me.

The fixed lens mean faster startup, no zzing zzing lenses in/out, just power up. I assume its a non-retracting lens?

Show Performance
20th September 2010, 12:56
I'm firmly in the fixed lens camp for this round at least. Doesn't bother me one bit, not when people are willing to shell out $2,000 for a fixed lens X1 that I am fairly confident the X100 will trounce (maybe 100x as good? :)

Steen
20th September 2010, 23:48
Here's a short but very precise analysis:

http://enticingthelight.com/2010/09/19/fujifilm-finepix-x100-where-the-hell-did-this-come-from/#sizecomp

Show Performance
21st September 2010, 02:59
The good (great) news: Price will come in at $1,000

The bad news: We have to wait until March 1st :(

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/21/fujifilms-finepix-x100-ships-march-2011-for-1-000-we-go-hands/

Vivek
21st September 2010, 03:19
The good (great) news: Price will come in at $1,000

The bad news: We have to wait until March 1st :(

http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/21/fujifilms-finepix-x100-ships-march-2011-for-1-000-we-go-hands/


From that link:


We just stopped by the Fujifilm booth in order to grab some video time with this guy, and sadly, the model that they had on display lacked a sensor of any kind.

:ROTFL:

Fuji are marketing a concept. :ROTFL:

(still way better than Olympsu plastic boxes)

Steen
21st September 2010, 04:56
(...) The bad news: We have to wait until March 1st :( (...)


:lecture: excellent, then there's still time to add a mount ... :angel:

Vivek
21st September 2010, 05:27
:lecture: excellent, then there's still time to add a mount ... :angel:

Once they figure out where to manufacture this thing...:rolleyes:

Show Performance
21st September 2010, 06:17
From that link:



:ROTFL:

Fuji are marketing a concept. :ROTFL:

(still way better than Olympsu plastic boxes)

Yeah, I love how the sample marketing images have a notation stating that they are *simulated.

Doesn't matter, the marketing wonks have done their job and generated a hellfire of interest on the www.

Given, what we can see, the body design and the hybrid OVF, I'm giving them enough credit to place my pre-order.

jminor
24th September 2010, 18:10
Here is a link to Fuji's web page for this camera.

http://www.finepix-x100.com/x100
:thumbs:

jminor
25th September 2010, 09:35
I like what I see so far, and the March 11 release date is perfect as it gives me time to save for the purchase. Plus, I'm sure we will learn more and more about the final product as the release date approaches. There is a lot of whining about the fixed lens, but that is a liberating feature, and like most folks, this won't be our only camera. I will continue to use and enjoy my E-PL1 and it's assortment of lenses. And if this is like some have said the first of new breed of camera from Fuji, all the better. To paraphrase Neil Armstrong, One small step for Fuji, One giant leap for digital photography. :thumbs:

jminor
26th September 2010, 19:12
I have a couple questions regarding the sensor. Is there a real noticable difference in image quality between an APS-C and 4/3rds sensor? Are the Fuji sensors a different breed than sensors from Sony and Panasonic, as far as their real world performance goes?

Vivek
26th September 2010, 22:01
I have a couple questions regarding the sensor. Is there a real noticable difference in image quality between an APS-C and 4/3rds sensor?

YES.


Are the Fuji sensors a different breed than sensors from Sony and Panasonic, as far as their real world performance goes?


As to the X100, it is still vaporware. We can only go by Fuji's claims for now.

Fuji had different sensors in their DSLRs. Leica have also made lenses with awesome bokeh. Fuji are trying to sell something based on their past record.
How X100 performs, when it actually shows up, remains to be seen.

Jerry_R
26th September 2010, 23:49
real noticable difference in image quality between an APS-C and 4/3rds sensor?

RE: 43 vs APS-C:
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/sensor-size.html

Steen
27th September 2010, 00:40
I have a couple questions regarding the sensor. Is there a real noticable difference in image quality between an APS-C and 4/3rds sensor? Are the Fuji sensors a different breed than sensors from Sony and Panasonic, as far as their real world performance goes?


Everything else being equal a larger sensor will give you higher Sensitivity, less Noise, wider Dynamic Range, and a more shallow Depth Of Field.

The problem is that "Everything else" is never equal, so we always have to compare the different systems and sensors in real use, or judge the actual results.

That said we can at least illustrate how small or big the size difference is between Four Thirds and APS-C (and also Full 24x36mm) sensors. See the below illustrations.

Of course the difference will be somewhat reduced if you tend to often crop the ends of the long dimension on the 3:2 aspect ratio to gain more of a 4:3 aspect ratio or so.

Personally I wouldn't upgrade for the sensor size difference alone.
But if I were to buy a new camera I would definitely go for the larger APS-C sensor over the smaller 4/3, everything else being equal :rolleyes:

With regards to the Fuji sensors breed, Fuji has since 1999 developed their own proprietary Super CCD sensors with a unique layout using octagonal, rather than rectangular, pixels.
But be aware that according to the dpreview link Fujifilm is this time going to put a CMOS sensor in the X100 camera.
So far I have seen no informations about who is the manufacturer of this sensor.




http://bondo.be/z/a522_0000.gif



http://bondo.be/z/a523_0000.gif

Vivek
27th September 2010, 02:20
Everything else being equal

The fact is, they are not. The current crop of APS-C sensors used in DSLRs (and non DSLRs) are far better than any 4/3rds and m4/3rds sensors made by Panasonic.

jonoslack
27th September 2010, 02:52
The fact is, they are not. The current crop of APS-C sensors used in DSLRs (and non DSLRs) are far better than any 4/3rds and m4/3rds sensors made by Panasonic.

HI Vivek
I was going to disagree with your YES - as the difference in size between APS-C and 4/3 really shouldn't amount to much (the wrotniak link shows it very well I think).

However - I do agree with you that the current Panasonic sensors found in 4/3 really don't seem to be as good as those in the Canon / Nikon / Sony cameras - a look at the A55 noise levels in Dpreview shows this up pretty well. These differences aren't to do with sensor size, but sensor quality. Pity really.

all the best

Vivek
27th September 2010, 04:35
HI Vivek

However - I do agree with you that the current Panasonic sensors found in 4/3 really don't seem to be as good as those in the Canon / Nikon / Sony cameras - a look at the A55 noise levels in Dpreview shows this up pretty well. These differences aren't to do with sensor size, but sensor quality. Pity really.

all the best

Exactly why I said what I said, Jono. Even if one crops an APS-C sensor image down to fit a 4/3rds image, the difference will be obvious.

A pity indeed.

jminor
27th September 2010, 04:54
Thanks for the information folks. Sensor size alone isn't the primary factor of my interest in this camera. And it isn't going to replace my m4/3rds camera, but will be a potential companion to my E-LP1.
Thanks again,
John

starfm
27th September 2010, 11:25
Looks cool, might be a good replacement for my current digital camera. Hopefully the price will be good.

Vivek
10th October 2010, 12:24
A wicked thought...;)

Since the camera would have an EVF and liveview, I do not see any harm in ripping the built-in lens off and putting a mount to use this cam as an interchangeable lens camera.

durrIII
10th October 2010, 13:27
I am sure that is what they have in mind for the next step.

jonoslack
10th October 2010, 14:10
I am sure that is what they have in mind for the next step.

I doubt it - otherwise why didn't they do it in the first step?

Jorgen Udvang
10th October 2010, 17:34
I doubt it - otherwise why didn't they do it in the first step?

There is a rumour floating around that they do indeed have plans for a camera with exchangeable lenses based on the same, or at least a similar, concept. That would make sense, since the viewfinder seems to be a brilliant idea. A semi-EVIL with hybrid viewfinder and a Fuji sensor? I would dig out my wallet relatively fast for that. Just have to buy a wallet first :D

Vivek
10th October 2010, 21:50
I think the Fujinon 23/2 in the proposed X100 is going to be swell.

I also think that it would not be difficult for Fuji to make an interchangeable lens cam.

Leica M mount patents are not there any more, are they? There are hundreds of thousands of Leica fit lenses floating around and very few of them see any action (not counting the fondler varieties) on an M8 or M9.

The hotshoe with connections for a TTL flash on the proposed X100 indicates a system thinking and not just a one off P&S cam.

jonoslack
10th October 2010, 23:22
There is a rumour floating around that they do indeed have plans for a camera with exchangeable lenses based on the same, or at least a similar, concept. That would make sense, since the viewfinder seems to be a brilliant idea. A semi-EVIL with hybrid viewfinder and a Fuji sensor? I would dig out my wallet relatively fast for that. Just have to buy a wallet first :D

Well, if it comes I can see that there would be some attraction.
Vivek - presumably a modified M mount is the obvious direction - but I wonder if they'll take the obvious, I can see that one might anticipate more lens sales by making proprietary. . . . . . and autofocus too. . . . . . So it would have to be some kind of modified M mount which allowed for electrical connections with AF lenses - interesting thought.

Jorgen Udvang
10th October 2010, 23:55
Well, if it comes I can see that there would be some attraction.
Vivek - presumably a modified M mount is the obvious direction - but I wonder if they'll take the obvious, I can see that one might anticipate more lens sales by making proprietary. . . . . . and autofocus too. . . . . . So it would have to be some kind of modified M mount which allowed for electrical connections with AF lenses - interesting thought.

Fuji would probably design a completely new mount. They aren't afraid of small niches, and they have lots and lots of experience. Something along the lines of a Contax G, but with a hybrid viewfinder and obviously Fujinon lenses.

Vivek
11th October 2010, 02:05
Actually, Jono, I am uncertain about the proposed X100 precisely because it has an AF lens.

I am really tired of the CDAF crap.

Fuji could leave those creations to Pana, Sony, Oly, Sam and Leica and make some real lenses.

jonoslack
11th October 2010, 02:17
Actually, Jono, I am uncertain about the proposed X100 precisely because it has an AF lens.

I am really tired of the CDAF crap.


Yes - it's been quite a revelation playing with the humble A33 - it sure focuses!

I think I can say that I no longer have a camera which uses CDAF - such a relief!

Vivek
11th October 2010, 04:44
What does the A33 offer (AF wise) that the Olympus, Sony, Nikon DSLRs you have used have not?

Really, these A33/55 are a rehash of the old stuff- unless the focusing is superior to the old- isn't it?

Just because they can shoot video and focus accurately (compared to the regular DSLRs)while videoing, does not make them any better to the current crop of DSLRs.

jonoslack
11th October 2010, 06:24
What does the A33 offer (AF wise) that the Olympus, Sony, Nikon DSLRs you have used have not?

Really, these A33/55 are a rehash of the old stuff- unless the focusing is superior to the old- isn't it?

Just because they can shoot video and focus accurately (compared to the regular DSLRs)while videoing, does not make them any better to the current crop of DSLRs.

I don't suppose they're better than the current crop of dSLR's - although the continuous focus seems to me to be considerably better than anything I've used before. Certainly when you take a shot and want to continue. Presumably this is because the mirror up doesn't affect the focusing.

But for me the real point is to have something which is very small, and which has a usefully large viewfinder (who would have believed I'd ever say this about an evf). It's really not much bigger than your G1, and the decent high ISO makes a fairly slow kit lens useable - even at fast shutter speeds and a long focal length.

Also it really doesn't seem to hunt.

But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the camera just 'feels' very agile and effective, and I was getting a much higher hit rate with the dog than I ever managed before - even with the D700 and D3 (although that probably relates more to my ability:
1. to swing a camera with a 400 equivalent focal length fast enough
2. understand all the nuances of Nikon's AF module)

Sorry - this is a diversion - but really it's in response to your CDAF comments, which I agree with - I'd rather use manual focus with a rangefinder!

Jorgen Udvang
11th October 2010, 07:24
Sorry - this is a diversion - but really it's in response to your CDAF comments, which I agree with - I'd rather use manual focus with a rangefinder!

It's an interesting diversion. For "slow photography", which I find very satisfying, I'm leaning more and more towards manual focus. I guess I should have a Leica, but they are too costly for me. It will be very interesting to see what the Fuji has to offer within this area.

jonoslack
11th October 2010, 09:17
It's an interesting diversion. For "slow photography", which I find very satisfying, I'm leaning more and more towards manual focus. I guess I should have a Leica, but they are too costly for me. It will be very interesting to see what the Fuji has to offer within this area.

Except that there really isn't anything slow about focusing with a Leica . . faster than CDAF in many circumstances anyway!

Vivek
11th October 2010, 09:57
Except that there really isn't anything slow about focusing with a Leica . . faster than CDAF in many circumstances anyway!

I agree that RF focusing can be fast given the right eyes.

jonoslack
11th October 2010, 10:19
I agree that RF focusing can be fast given the right eyes.

My eyes are standard 'old git' eyes (i.e. longsighted), not perfect - I can even focus okay without glasses, it just 'feels' right - I think it's mostly practice, it's no good shooting a few hundred shots a year and expecting to be good at it.

Jorgen Udvang
11th October 2010, 15:33
Except that there really isn't anything slow about focusing with a Leica . . faster than CDAF in many circumstances anyway!

I believe you. I focused manually for 40 years and never worried about it. Focusing only became a challenge when I bought my first AF camera (the S3). It's mostly a question of what we see in the viewfinder. This is one of the reasons why I'm buying the RX. It's the best viewfinder for manual focusing I've used (also compared to my OM-cameras, I've checked), at least this side of medium format.

So if Fuji could equip their hybrid viewfinder with a electronic focusing patch like in a rangefinder camera, that would really be something, wouldn't it?

Steen
14th December 2010, 00:44
Fujifilm has released more details of its Finepix X100.
Seems like they didn't add a mount for interchangeable lenses.
What a pity :(

http://www.finepix-x100.com/latest-updates

sagar
14th December 2010, 11:58
I find Ricoh GXR more interesting than Fuji X100. With an exception of a viewfinder its much more flexible fixed lens camera. that is if you don't think it as a system but am option to choose your lens.

Jorgen Udvang
14th December 2010, 14:48
Fujifilm has released more details of its Finepix X100.
Seems like they didn't add a mount for interchangeable lenses.
What a pity :(

http://www.finepix-x100.com/latest-updates

But they did explain why they didn't; size and image quality seems to be their reasons, both for the fixed lens and it being a non-zoom. I have no problems with that. It is what it is, and if it sells, they might come up with something more in the future.

Godfrey
14th December 2010, 15:47
I for one am glad they're sticking with a fixed lens mount. It affords more opportunity to optimize a particular lens and sensor, a particular camera, as a package. It's not a solution for everyone or every shooting situation.

I've already got my interchangeable lens cameras and my lens kit ... I don't want another 'system' to fuss with. I want a simple, high quality compact camera for when the system camera is overkill and too much to carry.

The Fuji X100 looks perfect for that.

Paratom
14th December 2010, 22:19
I for one am glad they're sticking with a fixed lens mount. It affords more opportunity to optimize a particular lens and sensor, a particular camera, as a package. It's not a solution for everyone or every shooting situation.

I've already got my interchangeable lens cameras and my lens kit ... I don't want another 'system' to fuss with. I want a simple, high quality compact camera for when the system camera is overkill and too much to carry.

The Fuji X100 looks perfect for that.

IMO the only reason for a fixed lens is size and weight.
But then at the size of the x100 I wonder if it should not have been possible to make it interchangable (if I look at m4/3 and Leica M).
I find the x1 size much more attractive for a compact. I do not know if I find the x100 compact. Still an attractive camera. I would probably rather go with a used M8 though and have the option to shoot also ultrawide or short 50mm FOV if I wanted, even though 35mm works fine for many things.

Jerry_R
18th December 2010, 14:26
Story - Chapter 1: http://www.finepix-x100.com/story

Godfrey
18th December 2010, 15:21
IMO the only reason for a fixed lens is size and weight.
But then at the size of the x100 I wonder if it should not have been possible to make it interchangable (if I look at m4/3 and Leica M).
I find the x1 size much more attractive for a compact. I do not know if I find the x100 compact. Still an attractive camera. I would probably rather go with a used M8 though and have the option to shoot also ultrawide or short 50mm FOV if I wanted, even though 35mm works fine for many things.
Don't forget cost.

Jorgen Udvang
18th December 2010, 17:58
Story - Chapter 1: http://www.finepix-x100.com/story

Thank you for the link. I can see that it would have been a bit complicated to achieve that with interchangeable lenses.

ptomsu
18th December 2010, 18:05
I am slowly moving away from fixed focal length cameras with the exception of the M system, because M allows at least to change the lens, which the X100 (and also Leica X1) do not. This is for me the most severe restriction in making this camera as flexible as I need.

Unfortunately it also uses a 12MP sensor, which is no longer state of the art n APSC as K5, D7000 etc show.

Sad that these restrictions do not match the absolutely great idea of the new hybrid VF. I only can hope that Leica will pick up that idea for their future M10 - together with a 30MP sensor ;)

Paratom
18th December 2010, 23:38
Don't forget cost.

Cost could be a factor - maybe not so much for makeing the x100 a camera with interchangable lenses but even more to develop a lens lineup.
Here Leica with all the old M glass was in a much better position (and still yes- the M9 costs multiple times of the x100)

So yes, in the end the x100 will be a compromise between price, size and function. For some it migt be just the solution (lets say somebody who wants something Leica M style but with more auto functions and who likes just 35mm and doesnt want to send the money for Leica M stuff).

Personally I found it more attractive it it either was smaller/lighter OR if it had exchangable lenses.

Godfrey
19th December 2010, 07:36
Cost could be a factor - maybe not so much for makeing the x100 a camera with interchangable lenses but even more to develop a lens lineup.
Here Leica with all the old M glass was in a much better position (and still yes- the M9 costs multiple times of the x100)

... Personally I found it more attractive it it either was smaller/lighter OR if it had exchangable lenses.

Both ... The M9 body costs multiple times what the X100 costs, never mind the cost (and size/weight/bulk) of the lenses.

Far as I can see, it's a perfect size for my hands and I already have my system cameras. A nicely crafted, single-lens compact like this ... always presuming the responsiveness and image quality is up to snuff ... is the perfect adjunct to my SLR kit. When I need something other than what it offers, I'll just grab the SLR. I don't need every camera to be capable of doing everything.

But I'm repeating myself... :-) Time to do some photography and continue waiting to see an X100!

Paratom
19th December 2010, 10:11
Both ... The M9 body costs multiple times what the X100 costs, never mind the cost (and size/weight/bulk) of the lenses.

Far as I can see, it's a perfect size for my hands and I already have my system cameras. A nicely crafted, single-lens compact like this ... always presuming the responsiveness and image quality is up to snuff ... is the perfect adjunct to my SLR kit. When I need something other than what it offers, I'll just grab the SLR. I don't need every camera to be capable of doing everything.

But I'm repeating myself... :-) Time to do some photography and continue waiting to see an X100!

the only thing I dont know is if I would call it a compact.

I agree that it is a nice addition to the camera market.

Lars
19th December 2010, 15:11
I am slowly moving away from fixed focal length cameras with the exception of the M system, because M allows at least to change the lens, which the X100 (and also Leica X1) do not. This is for me the most severe restriction in making this camera as flexible as I need.

Unfortunately it also uses a 12MP sensor, which is no longer state of the art n APSC as K5, D7000 etc show.
...


My guess is that the X100 is a market feeler from Fuji. Investment for making a single camera with a fixed lens has got to be a lot smaller than for creating a system. I'm sure that Fuji execs are emboldened by all the flattery arising from the X100 design - whether that turns into a viable business plan for an interchangeable-lens system is another question.

ptomsu
19th December 2010, 22:06
My guess is that the X100 is a market feeler from Fuji. Investment for making a single camera with a fixed lens has got to be a lot smaller than for creating a system. I'm sure that Fuji execs are emboldened by all the flattery arising from the X100 design - whether that turns into a viable business plan for an interchangeable-lens system is another question.

This may very well be right. But it does not answer WHY ONLY 12MP - and this today? When they bring this camera to market, the latest and really great 16MP APSC sensors will already be shipping for longer than 6 months. Time enough IMHO to build the X100 on such a sensor. Would have allowed them an even better and more efficient market research and business plan evaluation.

Godfrey
19th December 2010, 22:29
My guess is that the X100 is a market feeler from Fuji. Investment for making a single camera with a fixed lens has got to be a lot smaller than for creating a system. I'm sure that Fuji execs are emboldened by all the flattery arising from the X100 design - whether that turns into a viable business plan for an interchangeable-lens system is another question.

Fuji has developed and delivered top notch fixed-lens medium format (the "Texas Leica" 6x7 and 6x9 RF cameras, the GA and GS 645 series, etc) and specialty cameras (like the "hasselblad" XPan) for some time. They have an excellent reputation for quality.

I doubt Fuji is worried about its survival if the X100 doesn't sell in large quantities. Their camera division is hardly a drop in the bucket with respect to the company finances.

Lars
20th December 2010, 00:02
Fuji has developed and delivered top notch fixed-lens medium format (the "Texas Leica" 6x7 and 6x9 RF cameras, the GA and GS 645 series, etc) and specialty cameras (like the "hasselblad" XPan) for some time. They have an excellent reputation for quality.

I doubt Fuji is worried about its survival if the X100 doesn't sell in large quantities. Their camera division is hardly a drop in the bucket with respect to the company finances.

Umm I wasnt referring to the survival of Fuji, but rather the decision whether to create a new camera system. Businesses tend to like product plans that have a possibility of generating positive cash flow. Track record for Fuji's earlier system cameras probably hasn't been the greatest since we're not seeing any refresh on their modified Nikon body series.

OF COURSE Fuji has the competence and capability to make a top-of-the-line system. That doesn't mean such a product is financially viable as a business unit.

Lars
20th December 2010, 00:24
This may very well be right. But it does not answer WHY ONLY 12MP - and this today? When they bring this camera to market, the latest and really great 16MP APSC sensors will already be shipping for longer than 6 months. Time enough IMHO to build the X100 on such a sensor. Would have allowed them an even better and more efficient market research and business plan evaluation.

Some people would argue that 12 MP is sufficient for most snapshooting needs, and I'd have to say I cannot completely disagree. Sure, more would be nice but the step from 12 to 16 MP is just a selling point, not enough to make a real difference - just a 15.5% increase in pixel pitch.

Perhaps sensitivity had a higher priority than resolution in the choice of sensor. Perhaps the latest and greatest 16MP APSC sensors were not available for purchase or deemed too expensive. Perhaps an X101 is planned with a 16MP sensor, to milk the market in a year. Who knows. 12MP is what we're getting for now.

Paratom
20th December 2010, 00:36
Some people would argue that 12 MP is sufficient for most snapshooting needs, and I'd have to say I cannot completely disagree. Sure, more would be nice but the step from 12 to 16 MP is just a selling point, not enough to make a real difference - just a 15.5% increase in pixel pitch.

Perhaps sensitivity had a higher priority than resolution in the choice of sensor. Perhaps the latest and greatest 16MP APSC sensors were not available for purchase or deemed too expensive. Perhaps an X101 is planned with a 16MP sensor, to milk the market in a year. Who knows. 12MP is what we're getting for now.

I fully agree here-12 vs 16MP doesnt make a big difference IMO.

ptomsu
20th December 2010, 06:22
Some people would argue that 12 MP is sufficient for most snapshooting needs, and I'd have to say I cannot completely disagree. Sure, more would be nice but the step from 12 to 16 MP is just a selling point, not enough to make a real difference - just a 15.5% increase in pixel pitch.

Perhaps sensitivity had a higher priority than resolution in the choice of sensor. Perhaps the latest and greatest 16MP APSC sensors were not available for purchase or deemed too expensive. Perhaps an X101 is planned with a 16MP sensor, to milk the market in a year. Who knows. 12MP is what we're getting for now.

The real difference of the latest 16MP sensors is not only the 4MP more (25%) but rather the really improved high ISO performance compared to the older 12MP generations of sensors. So I would argue this is a very substantial increase of IQ! And with the 12 MP sensor the X100 will just lack that.

Godfrey
20th December 2010, 06:56
The real difference of the latest 16MP sensors is not only the 4MP more (25%) but rather the really improved high ISO performance compared to the older 12MP generations of sensors. So I would argue this is a very substantial increase of IQ! And with the 12 MP sensor the X100 will just lack that.

The linear resolution difference is the square root of the megapixel difference, or about 5% presuming all else (antialiasing filters, a-d conversion, comb filter, moire reduction and noise filtering) are all identical.

Fuji's sensors have always been top notch, I don't expect that to change.

Godfrey
20th December 2010, 06:58
Umm I wasnt referring to the survival of Fuji, but rather the decision whether to create a new camera system. Businesses tend to like product plans that have a possibility of generating positive cash flow. Track record for Fuji's earlier system cameras probably hasn't been the greatest since we're not seeing any refresh on their modified Nikon body series.

OF COURSE Fuji has the competence and capability to make a top-of-the-line system. That doesn't mean such a product is financially viable as a business unit.

I think we're debating in circles. The X100 is not a system camera. People here are saying they'd prefer a system camera with interchangeable lenses. Fuji's been successfully delivering fixed lens, non-system cameras for a long time.

Lars
20th December 2010, 08:21
The real difference of the latest 16MP sensors is not only the 4MP more (25%) but rather the really improved high ISO performance compared to the older 12MP generations of sensors. So I would argue this is a very substantial increase of IQ! And with the 12 MP sensor the X100 will just lack that.

You are assuming that Fuji's sensor is sub-par and older generation just because it's 12 MP?

Terry
22nd December 2010, 05:19
I followed a link the the Fuji site and just read about the lens in the upcoming camera....I was not overly interested in a fixed lens camera but aspects of the Fuji are really starting to get quite interesting....

http://www.finepix-x100.com/story/

First up the sensor is custom made with micro lenses a la the M8/M9 allowing for the lens to sit close to the sensor.

The camera has a built in (user implemented) 3 stop ND filter....allowing for wide open shooting in a lot more situations.

That in combination with 9 blades for the aperture for hopefully nicer bokeh

For flash shooters it looks like a leaf shutter allowing for high synch speeds.

Jerry_R
22nd December 2010, 05:43
Short minimum focusing distance is also shorter than rangefinder lenses.

Kphelan
23rd December 2010, 09:35
Interesting piece on today's (12/23/2010) Online Photographer (http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/12/the-viewfinder-story.html). Evidently a web page about the X100 viewfinder was recently posted, possibly by accident according to Mike Johnston. Mike suggested checking it out before the page is taken down.

Viewfinder story here (http://www.finepix-x100.com/story/viewfinder). It looks like Fuji is drawing upon their past experiences with the big "Texas Leica" Fuji rangefinder cameras. All good if true.

---Kent

Terry
23rd December 2010, 10:27
Kent -
I looked at it last night when I found a link for it on DPReview. There is a "Chapter 1" section that is all about the lens which I linked to above....I was trying to figure out what Chapter 3 is going to be about.

I am hugely impressed with Fuji's marketing here and how they are really explaining a lot about the camera, their thought process and the interaction with design and what made it in the final specs.

I was initially not thrilled with the fixed prime lens but have done an about face on the camera. I hope it is as good as the stuff reads.

Godfrey
23rd December 2010, 10:52
The viewfinder story is interesting. The more I look at this camera, the more I like it. And I liked it right off the bat. :-)

raymondluo
24th December 2010, 08:09
Why do people so easily assume the non-use of 16MP sensors mean that Fuji is using a previous generation sensor? Megapixels are not representative of sensors or image quality. In fact the smaller megapixel specified the higher the pixel density will be. And pixel density is an important factor in image quality.

This is why Nikon cameras have to much extent not played the megapixel race, and quite likely a contributing factor to why Olympus swore on the nothing beyond 12MP rule.

And even if Fuji is using a previous generation sensor, it is specified exactly to the lens. One thing I loved they did is talk about how the light hits the lens and they've modified to do that (as they say) perfectly. This is a problem very relevant in interchangeable systems and adaptable lenses but it is a largely unknown issue only mostly obscurely discussed, and insurmountable to test.

In any case what I'm saying is that as a gearhead, photography is about making smart compromises. In this they've sacrificed interchangeability(usability) for image quality. And at 35mm f/2 135 equiv? that's a smart compromise that works for me. Although I haven't looked at it's actual size yet.

raymondluo
24th December 2010, 08:13
In retrospect for size I realized that even thought the Leica X1 is smaller, I would still be tempted to add the accessory grip for it anyways, making it no less the same than the Fuji X100.

It seems I am a definite buyer.

Lars
25th December 2010, 03:47
The viewfinder article confirms once again that Fuji is using a no-compromise approach to the design of the X100. I agree with Terry - great marketing. It will be very interesting to see how this carries over to the actual product.

Jorgen Udvang
28th December 2010, 07:01
My favourite camera shop in Bangkok apparently has it already, or at least they have a photo of one taken in the shop. I'm going there tomorrow :)

Here's the link:
http://www.avcamera.com

m3photo
28th December 2010, 08:22
My favourite camera shop in Bangkok apparently has it already, or at least they have a photo of one taken in the shop.
With a "thumbs-up" and a soft-release button, nice!

photoSmart42
28th December 2010, 09:09
My favourite camera shop in Bangkok apparently has it already, or at least they have a photo of one taken in the shop. I'm going there tomorrow :)

Here's the link:
http://www.avcamera.com

Wow, that's a surprise! Let us know if it's real or just a mock-up! Can't wait.

Jorgen Udvang
29th December 2010, 05:44
Mock-up, gone already :(

Terry
29th December 2010, 05:56
Bummer but that did seem quite early for a camera due out in late March.

Anders_HK
29th December 2010, 15:20
A camera shop here in Hong Kong where I know the folks estimate a price of 11,000 HKD or over 1,400 USD. Camera gear in Hong Kong is usually around low price level in USA.

Any takers @ 1,500 USD???

Perhaps we should ask Jack delete this thread to avoid speculation and a bubble???

Regards
Anders

Godfrey
29th December 2010, 16:13
Fuji stated when it was announced a US price ~$1000.

If it performs to expectations, ~$1500 is not out of bounds.

Yes, I'd buy one.

Terry
4th January 2011, 10:18
The next installment has been posted.

http://www.finepix-x100.com/story/craftsmanship?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=jan

ptomsu
4th January 2011, 10:27
Looks all very appealing!

I know I may sound pessimistic now, but I only can hope it is not so much over hype as it was while Olympus introduced the E3, which was highly praised but finally could not come close to my (and also others) expectations in different areas. Unfortunately the whole marketing campaign reminds me very much on that E3 launch - lot of hot air .....

Lets keep fingers crossed ;)

Martin S
4th January 2011, 10:57
What better way to keep the X-100 in our minds than by these periodic messages from the design team.

A very effective marketing tool. I hope that the final product is as well thought out, and as functional as these periodic messages.

They certainly keep me interested.

Martin

Martin S
4th January 2011, 22:53
As an addendum to my prior post, I would like to see some discussions from Fuji of how more detailed technical information and operational details were arrived at.

Since the appearance of these articles seem to be as to how certain physical, and construction decisions were made early on in the design phase, it would be interesting to see discussions of how more technical decisions were made.

How fast was the AF in normal and low light operation supposed to be, and what ways of optimizing these design parameters were possible.

Similarly, the noise levels and speed of the sensor, rate of buffer clearing, and speed of burst mode etc. How were the final characteristics determined, and implemented???

Also, sharpness, and general handling qualities. How were these parameters optimized??? How fast is the camera for the next shot???? Speed of CPU, and even which CPU???

Since Fuji likes to provide such specific details, as to the material, and even stitching of the camera case, how about telling us about the internal discussions for the strength of the AA filter, or construction materials of, and predicted longevity of the shutter.

I realize that some of his will be available in reviews just prior to release, but it is now close enough to the predicted release date that Fuji should start to release some of this information now.

Just my opinion. YMMV.

Martin

Godfrey
5th January 2011, 06:36
I decided to test the form factor of the X100 for my use as an adjunct to my SLR system. I pulled out my Olympus Trip 35, unused for many years but still in perfect condition. Just about the same size and weight, slightly longer focal length equivalent (40mm f/2.8 rather than 35mm f/2), similar simplicity of controls.

I loaded a roll of Ilford XP2 Super and will be shooting with it this week ... but at first play, the beautiful, clear bright line finder, compact but not fiddly size, simple controls, etc etc are looking to be a very nice carry-anywhere camera.

Makes me even more eager to see the Fuji X100 in the flesh. What am I doing to myself? ;-)

Anders_HK
5th January 2011, 15:38
Fuji stated when it was announced a US price ~$1000.

If it performs to expectations, ~$1500 is not out of bounds.

Yes, I'd buy one.


Well, if price around 1500 usd seems Fuji only got one taker in one week.

At first their site seemed present smart to me, but now is looking over done. Comes down to it, what is actual image quality???

One serious contender could be the iPhone 5, cheaper, even if less image quality would be always in pocket anyways, and no extra charger.

Fuji should bear in mind in my opinion that they market to among folks serious in photography and very high end gear. Thus... Will X100 stack up??

Rgds
Anders

Godfrey
5th January 2011, 16:10
Well, if price around 1500 usd seems Fuji only got one taker in one week.
...
One serious contender could be the iPhone 5, cheaper, even if less image quality would be always in pocket anyways, and no extra charger.

Fuji should bear in mind in my opinion that they market to among folks serious in photography and very high end gear. Thus... Will X100 stack up??


Just because more people haven't jumped up and said "I'll buy!" doesn't mean that they've only got me as a customer ... :-)

But comparing it to an iPhone camera? That seems a little silly, IMO. Fuji's fixed lens rangefinder cameras were loved by pros and advanced photographers ... and they weren't cheap either. There are always people who are willing to pay for real quality.

Of course, no one can say how the camera performs until it ships and gets into the hands of users. I'll make my purchase decision when I evaluate one for real, in the flesh.

jorgeAD
10th January 2011, 21:10
Hi there... Its been a while since my last post, yet, since I always found people at this formu extremely friendly and knowledgeable...

I still love my little Ricoh GRD-2 as it has the most intuitive controls of any camera I have used. Its tiny sensor is great for zone focusing, especially with the 21mm equivalent lens add-on, and does not seems to sacrifice any sharpness at all. Sadly it is hopelessly noisy beyond ISO 400. So whenever I plan to work with available-light or use depth-of-field to separate subject from background, I have to drag along an EOS 7D and fast primes.

Enter the FinePix X-100, promising and uber-corrected, fine-tuned by hand, fast 35 mm equivalent lens that just by itself would cost around 700$ (its closest quality comparison would be Canon 24mm 1.4 L mkii, 1500$ ), a camera with real physical controls that stay put, CMOS sensor with offset microlenses to correct vignetting, standard ISO 6400 sensitivity, dynamic range greater than the legendary Finepix S5, 5 fps, and a big bright optical hybrid viewfinder that lets one electronically review the shot without having to remove the eye from the eyepiece.

So I have a couple of questions, as I understand the X-100 hardware to be finalized:

Is the X-100 really using the Sony sensor from Nikons D700/A300 ?

http://www.cameralabs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=207910&sid=87358c8a2d0c3326db6a87c0709b3d43

Any idea on how to get Fuji to use DNG instead of forcing us to change workflows or compromise image quality ?

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/12/fuji-x100-update.html

Any insight if the X-100 contrast-detection AF might be able to focus in candlelight as my 7D does ? (deal-breaker for me... I know i know I should just wait for real world tests...)

Thanks for your time, and sorry for my non native english.:confused:

Godfrey
10th January 2011, 21:54
...
So I have a couple of questions, as I understand the X-100 hardware to be finalized:

Is the X-100 really using the Sony sensor from Nikons D700/A300 ?
...
Any idea on how to get Fuji to use DNG instead of forcing us to change workflows or compromise image quality ?


- If it's using a derivative of the D700/A300 sensor, it will be good.

- I'll wait for Adobe to include it in their raw support ... at which point whether it is FRW or DNG is irrelevant.

- Anything else, it all depends what's in the final package when it ships.

Terry
11th January 2011, 02:31
Fuji on their website have said that they expect support from third party raw developers in addition to the version of silkypix that they supply. This upfront acknowledgement of the other raw programs leaves me hopeful that they will supply the needed files to Adobe and others fast enough to get quick support.

Anders_HK
11th January 2011, 03:41
Is the X-100 really using the Sony sensor from Nikons D700/A300 ?


Indeed if they are it would be disappointing, since per www.finepix-x100.com/en/x100/custom-aps-c-sensor

"FUJIFILM has customised an APS-C size 12.3 megapixel CMOS sensor for the FinePix X100; resulting in an ideal match for the performance characteristics of the 23mm F2 lens, which also works in tandem with the newly developed EXR Processor."

Waiting... that sensor and camera better live up to what their marketing claims of it as being soooooo good... (which is one point I doubt for now)... else just another among all other small cameras... one many sold on believing is so much better than prior... :cry: :deadhorse:

Thus is why I very seriously mentioned iPhone 5 in my post above :thumbs:

Regards
Anders

Godfrey
11th January 2011, 06:25
..
Waiting... that sensor and camera better live up to what their marketing claims of it as being soooooo good... (which is one point I doubt for now)... else just another among all other small cameras... one many sold on believing is so much better than prior...

It will have a unique viewfinder at least. Other qualities can only be judged once the camera is in production and in users' hands.

Oren Grad
11th January 2011, 06:42
"FUJIFILM has customised an APS-C size 12.3 megapixel CMOS sensor for the FinePix X100; resulting in an ideal match for the performance characteristics of the 23mm F2 lens, which also works in tandem with the newly developed EXR Processor."

Waiting... that sensor and camera better live up to what their marketing claims of it as being soooooo good...

That isn't a claim that it will be vastly superior to anyone else's sensor, it's just saying that they've taken an existing sensor that's very competent and done what was needed to make it work well with a compact, short-register fixed lens rather than a long-register SLR lens.

From a user perspective the value-added in the X100 is in the body, not the sensor. Folks who are looking for a digital Hexar AF are likely to be happy, assuming the viewfinder isn't a total kludge, the AF performance is reasonable, etc. Those who are looking for some revolutionary difference in image quality will be sorely disappointed.

Helena
11th January 2011, 07:21
When I first heard about this camera I was really excited. The enthusiasm has faded somewhat since then, mostly because of its size (I had hoped that it'd be a bit smaller). For that size I'd prefer either a FF sensor or a f/1.4 lens (or both, but I don't know if that'd be possible), but I really like how it looks, the focal length, the view finder and the close MFD, so I may still buy one. :) I'll try and wait a few months after its release though, until I'm sure that it lives up to the expectations.

jorgeAD
11th January 2011, 10:24
I guess we have all fallen victim of photo marketing hype at some point so I understand the curbed enthusiasm. It isnt really a compact camera as Helena points out, however, at 5.4 centimeters thick it is only marginally thicker than an X1, and between half and one third the thickness of any other APS-C sized camera with an equivalent F2 lens.

Just how far FujiFilm compromised in order to keep it almost compact remains to be seen. I agree with Oran that viewfinder and AF performance are the defining factors.

Having too much time in my hands, and no technical scruples, I compared Fujinons 23mm F2 MTF chart to Canon EF 35mm F2 MTF (both wide open and in relative, not absolute terms):

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_35mm_f_2

The 23mm holds on to 75% contrast sensitivity (and subjective sharpness) half through the field (away from the center). The 35mm is already at 55%. Most importantly, in that last third, near the corners, the 35mm drops abruptly from 45% to 15%, while the 23mm manages to hold on around 55% all the way out to the corner. And this is wide open, performance at F4 @ 30lp/mm hold on to 75-80% in that critical last third.

So it seems to beat an old design 300$ 35mm full frame lens... Should I expect it to be as good as the current best, no physical/price compromise DSLR lens design: the Zeiss ZA T 24mm F2 for Sony..($1200 lens only... camera not included :D ) ?

http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/567-zeiss24f2?start=1

I dont think so...

TEBnewyork and Godfrey: I figure the Ricoh GRD spoiled me with its future proof, develop anywhere you want DNG files. I teach photography in Central America using free and open source software and we use and love Raw Therapee. So if you get a chance please pay a visit to the X-100 website and, as I did, suggest they include a .DNG file format option... (firmware is still being finalized !).

Andres_HK: “Customize” is very different from "built from scratch”. I tend to avoid version 1 of anything as do not enjoy being a paying beta tester, yet I find the X-100 design and functionality very atractive, as it appears to build upon collective knowledge of how a RF candid & available light photography camera should handle. It reminds me how I learned camera controls with a Petri 7s as a 13 year-old, how I honed my skills to anticipate and catch the decisive moment with a Leica M3 in photo school, and even later, when I made a living doing architectural photography with a "compact" medium format Fujica GS645W (amazing lens by the way).

Godfrey
11th January 2011, 10:41
...
TEBnewyork and Godfrey: I figure the Ricoh GRD spoiled me with its future proof, develop anywhere you want DNG files. I teach photography in Central America using free and open source software ...

While I also would like a .DNG file output capability for raw image files, once Adobe supports it DNG Converter is free and freely distributed too. It will take whatever format they end up with and make .DNGs from them, so you'll be able to continue using free and open source software.

I use Lightroom and Photoshop. All my raw image files are converted to .DNG on import, so I never work with anything but .DNG files except for what comes out of the cameras. I have, however, added a user feedback comment requesting a .DNG format raw file option.

Martin S
18th January 2011, 06:16
I have been looking at the descriptions of this camera, but it is not clear if it is image stabilized. Anyone out there who can answer this question???

From the diagram of the lens, it appears that the lens in not stabilized. Any ideas if the sensor is image stabilized????

Thanks.

Martin

Lars
18th January 2011, 06:41
It is not image-stabilized. With a high-speed sensor, wideangle lens at f/2 and an optical viewfinder the need for IS is arguably limited.

Martin S
18th January 2011, 07:17
Thank you. I thought that it was not stabilized. We'll have to see about the image quality, DR, and other aspects of this interesting camera.

Martin

thinkfloyd
21st January 2011, 04:07
I am 75% sold on this camera... just waiting for image samples and reviews to boost it to 100%!

aum235
21st January 2011, 16:15
I was very tempted too by this camera when I first learned that it was gonna come out.

But I've been waiting too long now, since september.
In the meantime, pentax in Europe at least has conducted a great marketing operation between nov 2010 and jan 2011, offering a significant discount to every new owner of a K-R or K-5.
So I went for a K-5 because all this time along, there was nowhere to have an X100 just in hands at least... yes, at least, to see if that viewfinder is confortable or not in terms of width of what you see inside.
That's an important matter for me : how big is the image that you see in the viewfinder.
Not being able in any sorts to check that specific parameter in time (before the Pentax special offer expired), I didn't want to take the risk, so went for the K-5.

I've also anyway been having concerns about the sensor itself-for what I read here and there, that sensor is not based on Fuji's latest sensor technology -> what about quality in the high ISO range ?
That brings me to the next point : even though it opens at f1:4, it's true that it doesn't have a stabilizer.
Ok, true, IS is not an obligation, and one could say 'hey ! how d'you think they did back in the old days !' Well I've known the old days, and they were nice, but so is IS today.
Indeed the camera is nice, and even more than nice, but at that price, IS could/would somehow be expected.

That brings me to the last point : the price.
Back in Sept 2010, Fuji seemed to say that it would cost around 1000$.
... but recently, at the CES that took place in Vegas last week, Fuji finally communicated the accurate figure : 1199$ !!!

There again, that perspective makes me surely not regret to have chosen a K-5 !!!

Still, I sure am going to check out that creature as soon as it gets out in stores !