« Beautiful Fuji | Main | Olympus to End Development of 4/3rds Lenses »

Monday, 20 September 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This what I wanted the Leica X1 to be.

I totally agree with your remark about price. Nice cameras should be expensive. They have to be generous, giving the photographer every bit of joy and quality. They have to inspire excellence.
On a side note, I wish the focusing ring had distance markings. There, I said it. Now back to the celebration.

Well said! I'm as excited as a kid over this new FUJI. A zoom lens would have ruined it. I can only hope other manufacturers will learn what happens when you get it right.

It is all great.

Just tiny little bit if we can have the distance marked or we can set the distance ... you can then just look from the top, pick up the camera and shoot! Probably not much of shutter lag as well as it is all manual.


"I want it to be as expensive as possible. Why? Because I want them to make this camera as nice as they possibly can make it."

Second that motion. And thank the gods no stupid zoom lens. Just a beautiful (and yes expensive) prime lens. Wow! Just wow!

This is the digital rangefinder Leica should be announcing. But they won't. Not yet...at least until they license the technology from Fuji. Then folks will have something really to bitch about in terms of pricing.

What is REALLY wonderful about this camera and the technology: it can be scaled up. If I recall, Fuji makes a very nice F mount camera.

Just a matter of time before we see a full frame M mount version of the X100. Hopefully with the name Zeiss somewhere on the body.

I myself plan on selling a Leica DRF to fund the purchase of the X1000 and have plenty of cash left over to purchase an Epson 3880 and still have pocket change!

Damn fine time to be a photographer.

Speaking of money, lots of people are saying they hope it'll be inexpensive. Not me. I don't want it to be reasonably priced. I want it to be as expensive as possible. Why? Because I want Fuji to make this camera as nice as they possibly can make it. Go ahead, take my money. Just make it worth the cost. I'll be happy.

I agree. If Fuji delivers it in roughly this form and it performs even halfway decently, I will buy one irrespective of its price. (Although with that said, I'd prefer it had a slightly wider angle lens...)

Oh yes. 24/2.8 and I'm in.

I, too, am happy to see the fixed lens. The biggest problem I had with my M8 was dust on the sensor.

FINALLY, a true and truely affordable DMD!

Leica M8 hardly missed.
Leica M9 certainly is, but too expensive.
Leica X1 can hardly be a DMD.
Panasonic GF1 is lovely and cute, but a little bit slow, and without an OVF.

And here comes the Fuji X100!


BTW, FLOVE is new and good, but DMD is old but better.

Fuji X100
read Konica Hexar mark 1 fixed lens, mark 2 M mount.
Gets you thinking
Oh well better take out another mortgage

CV 6 x 7 or Fuji 6 x 7 in some markets - Zeiss Ikon or Bessa - Fuji X100 or ?

What you said, Mike. And a fixed lens is fine. I could epoxy a 35 to my M6 and it would not be a big deal. The DSLR is fine for other lenses.

"If the early interest in this camera pans out, Fuji should just make more variants with different lenses. "

Yeah! I'll go with that... it appears that interest in the Bessa III / Fuji GF670 was enough for them to announce development of a "wide" version - and that's a film camera!

Glad to see you guys have all this extra $$ laying around the house to spend on yet another camera!! ;-)

Are you really that dissatisfied with the cameras you have? Sheesh!

I certainly sympathize with people hoping it'll be as good as Fuji can make it. (It won't be; nothing ever is. Engineers can always make things a little bit better for a huge chunk more money.) I understand being relatively insensitive to the price (though I expect most of you who have used phrases similar to "regardless of price" would not in fact buy it if it came out at $9500).

But I must strongly differ with people who "want it to be as expensive as possible." I suspect you don't really mean that; I expect you're just strongly emphasizing that you favor IQ and handling over price.

On the lens front, I actually would be happy with a couple of screw-on adapters, say a .7X wide-angle and a 1.5X tele, if--and this is a big "if"--they could be done without damaging image quality lots and lots (moderate damage I could live with). I have been unable to tell from the product pictures whether the lens has a filter thread.

I used to wax cockamamie on various photography forums about a camera very much like this Fuji but with a modern version of the Kodak Retina IIIc lens system where the front element unit of the fixed base lens could be interchanged to change the focal length. Screw-on adapters would be the next best thing (again, if they're not terrible--wish I knew more about optics and could judge the likely terribleness of such an product at a price of, say, $299 or $399 per adapter).

On camera price: this is clearly intended to be a boutique product, and also clearly tailored to the Japanese home market (even if, as appears to be the case, Fuji will also market it abroad). Retro high-end cameras do well in Japan, and whiz-bang technology does well in Japan, and this camera is a uniquely charming combination of both qualities (the Olympus Pen series walks in a partially similar landscape). All that adds up to an easy prediction that the reports out of Japan of pricing in the $1400-1700 range are perfectly accurate.

Don't you know - just when I thought my pocket book was safe from further temptation for awhile, along comes one of those products that maybe, possibly, you think you can't live without.


Addendum to my earlier comment:

Yes, I realize that screw-on wide or tele adapters would not work well with the optical viewfinder -- I'm presuming one would use them with the electronic VF. Not ideal, but I'd still be willing to do it.

Totally agree, no cheapness, just goodness please...

You got it right ...Three cameras! Brings me back to my youth of photojournalism...two M2's... one with the 21 other with the 90.....sure miss em...stolen and I never went back from my SLR's until...I get my hands on this/theses...sure hope Fuji takes your suggestion of three cameras...you'll never have to clean that sensor either. Thanks for being a voice for all us on this type of camera.

Any idea how this camera is manually focused?

I can't really imagine an 85mm fixed lens camera being that popular.

I second the remark about offering multiple versions of the camera with different fixed focal lengths. Primes are great fun to work with, just give me something slightly less wide than 35mm-e.

I do not understand those who complain of a lack of zoom lens. I'm with you - fixed-lens! I love my fixed-lens serious compacts - Ricoh GXR/A12, Sigma DPx's. Will add the Fuji the day I can. Can't wait.

How is this anything but a glorified pocket digital camera with a larger sensor and a fixed lens.

There are so many great digital pocket cameras at 1/3 the price that it is really difficult to get excited about this.

Are you sure that all the excitement isn't just about the look of the camera, with traditional speed and aperture dials, rather than the function of the camera?
After all, it would not have been that difficult to give it an interchangeable mount, even if proprietary... interchangeable lens rangefinders have been available for many decades.

I wonder how agile Fuji's engineering department is? Given the 5 months or more that will pass before the camera is on the market, it may be possible to include a manual focus ring on that lens with an engraved scale, and a few lines of code in the firmware to allow the user to set up an option in the menu so that the AF doesn't turn on with the camera - that would make it near instantaneous in operation.

I suspect (given the buzz that this is generating) that Fuji will be listening very intently to the early feedback, and they've certainly got enough time to make a few tweaks.

Can we have it in all black, as well? ;)

For what it's worth, another vote in favour of a focusing scale on the lens. Or if that can't be done, how about a hyperfocal focus mode, where changing the aperture changes the focus point?

>> I want Fuji to make this camera as nice as they possibly can make it.

Agreed. If it's actually be everything it looks like it's setting out to be, it will have to cost a little more.

I've wanted this camera since the dawn of the APS sensor. I have a GF-1 with an EVF and a 20mm lens (and no intention of purchasing another). It's close, but this looks to be the one I've been waiting for. If solid and quick, it'll be exactly what I need for 99% of my photography.

I also agree with Mike's sentiment in the original post; this is the most pleasing photography news I've seen in a very long time.

I can not understand how so many other manufacturers managed to miss out on this for so long. This camera has the controls many have been asking for (why would anyone buy a G11 if the S90 comes so close in a smaller package? The direct controls in my most likely answer) And this camera has the viewfinder the Oly EP series and the Leica X1 should have had.
I am afraid of the price, especialy if more versions are made. Getting a wide and a tele would be perfect, but way out of my reach. I expect this one will be at the top of my 'not gone completely crazy' mark but I am so much hoping it well be a little cheaper...
The old Fuji medium format camera's were always just beyond my financiel means. Please do not repeat that history!

My extreme disappointment in Olympus announcing that there will be no more 4/3 lenses has been tempered by the announcement of such a wonderful thing by Fuji.

As Mike has said, if it's operation is extremely fast and quick, then the camera we have all been waiting most of a decade for has finally arrived.

I think they should capitalize on the momentum of this camera by making the "X101" - EVIL, with this current lens interchangeable, and a 15mm f/2.8 and 60mm f/2.0 . If they made that, Fuji would never be able to keep up with demand.

My one area of concern is how well the focusing system performs. Fuji's specs say it will have "high-speed contrast AF." The question about "high-speed" is, compared to what? If we're expecting something as quick as predictive AF in a DSLR we may be disappointed.

We should also keep in mind that just because it looks like a rangefinder camera doesn't mean it has a rangefinder. As far as I can tell, it doesn't, so the next question is, how easy and accurate is manual focus? Can you manage it with the viewfinder or do you have to use the rear LCD?

Believe me, I'm just as excited about this camera as everyone else. I've just learned from years of experience that real cameras are seldom as wonderful as we imagine them to be.

Anyone else get the feeling the name "X100" was a jab at Leica?

As nice as it is - and THANK GOD Fuji realise that sometime's there's nothing better than a hunk of glass to squint through - it's a bit out of my price range for a such a specific camera. I'm not a dentist.

I wish camera design like this wasn't a niche.

I don't spend much time thinking about camera gear these days, but this one does get my attention because it could be a new tool, not just another tool marginally better than the tools I already have.

As far as the cost goes, I understand the enthusiasm behind "I want it to be as expensive as possible" but what I want is for it to be fairly priced for a top quality item. By that I mean that Fuji should make a good profit on a price that reflects fair value. If there is a "Leica premium" factored in, then count me out.

"Fuji should just make more variants with different lenses."

You are right Mike, at least, you are right in that this is what Fuji will most likely do -- Just like their Texas Leica, and their 645 film cameras.

Unfortunately, for me that will make it too expensive to jump in. And also too many cameras to carry around. I am hopeful for an interchangeable lens camera. Then, as a real person with a real budget, I can stretch and buy the camera with one lens, and save for the next lens.

Saving for another lens with a camera body attached is just out of reach for someone like me. As much as this looks like almost exactly like the camera I have been looking for, I think I will have to wait a bit longer.

Perhaps one of the new Pentax cameras will be my digital MX, which will be just fine.

"I want it to be as expensive as possible. Why? Because I want them to make this camera as nice as they possibly can make it."

Second that motion. And thank the gods no stupid zoom lens. Just a beautiful (and yes expensive) prime lens. Wow! Just wow!

I agree completely with the above, especially the "no stupid zoom lens" sentiment.

It'll be a great camera for a few people, including many people who read this forum. With a three-lens kit (35-equiv, 50-equiv, 85-equiv) it would have been a phenomenon.


To those who want the x100 to be as expensive as possible to ensure excellent quality - buy an M9. When you've done that let me know the size of the market. Personally, I would like this new Fuji to be fairly priced so that it represents good value. Then it may be possible for a larger number of enthusiastic photographers interested in this format to experience the pleasure of using it.

When I think about it, the reason I want interchangeable lenses has little to do with using more than one lens on the same camera, and everything to do with a desire to keep putting new sensors behind the same lens.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person thinking this way.

The specs on this tantalizing new camera eliminate many costly considerations, such as a forward-looking, new lens mount and subsequent lens roadmap (it sports a fixed lens)...how to balance zoom quality against versatility (fixed focal length)...how to appeal to a profitably broad swatch of jaded consumers who demand ever more features and tricks (this is a premium product that will appeal to a niche market).

Look at what this camera is tasked to do. Except for the groundbreaking viewfinder (=expensive), the technology to produce such a relatively simple camera--simple, in terms of its clearly defined role--would not seem to imply stratospheric cost.

Rather, the market itself in early 2011 will present pricing guidelines. Such as: money will still tight for consumers, including many upscale buyers. (Although Tiffany & Co. seems to rack up decent profit every quarter.) Also, the Olympus E-P2 hovers near $1000, defining the low end of the high end in this sector. (Assuming we can reliably put the new Fuji in any sector just yet.) The Leica X1 is fixed at $2000. There may be significant peril at overreaching these boundaries.

But also consider the cameras available (at least body-only) in the middle of this range. Very capable, versatile DSLR's from the usual suspects. Some of them decently compact, too. As you stray closer to red-dot territory ($2000), some potential buyers will wither under the harsh light of practicality: they can get a finer photographic instrument for less money. And certainly a more versatile one.

I suggest that it might be possible for Fuji to make the X100 as mouth-watering as we expect and want it to be, and still turn a profit at $1200-$1500, given a high-enough volume of sales.

Is this as expensive as Mike wants it to be? As costly as the early commenters want? I wouldn't know. But for many of us, that range between $1000 and $2000 is plenty dear enough. Above that, and we are simply and regretably shut out.

(Now watch the X100 launch at $3500 and sell like gangbusters. I'm prepared to put the egg mask over my face in short order.)

Mike, even at the proposed (rumored) price range of $1800 it's still less than the cost of one Leica lens. This one is getting raves all over the web. Finally, I'll be able to replace my Canonet QL17 with something just as good!!!!

I just love to see clever execution like Fuji seems to be doing with the X100. It will probably be too expensive for me but if it will be successful, we might see other similar cameras and, anyway, cheaper options might appear later. Also, I hope more camera makers will look to offering real alternatives instead of this continuing bigger, faster, better but pretty much the same as I feel DSLRs have been.

But am I the only one who's tired of the 2:3 aspect ratio? It just doesn't seem to suit most of what I want to do but I want to see things in the aspect ratio I'm using. Hopefully Fuji takes a clue from Panasonic and offers other aspect ratios. 4x5 and square, thank you very much. Toss in a wide-ish normal lens, say a 28mm with at least an aperture of f/2, and I might have to start saving up.

Mike, when are you going to announce you have done a deal with Fuji for a quantity of limited edition FLOVE's with a very discreet TOP in Gold to the right of the lens? The followers would be delighted!

I respectfully disagree about price: if they make it as expensive as they can - price it comparable to a Leica, for e.g. - then it will just be a niche product, mostly for well-off hobbyists and gear snobs to add to their collections - again just like (digital) Leica.

Agree on all counts, Mike. Fixed is simple and solid. There's probably no *perfect* walk-around focal length, but I would venture 35-e is the best compromise (although for me not a compromise).

Fingers crossed that it's DSLR-responsive. There'll be a loud deflating groan throughout the photo-sphere if it's not.

Anyway, there's no reason some other manufacturer (hello, Nikon, Canon, Pentax...) can't bring out a similar but multi-lens rangefinderesque. (New category.)

Remember when the the Hexar went from reasonably pricy fixed-lens to wildly expensive interchangable? Didn't understand that.

Just to toot my horn. It was me calling for a 23mm (along with 34 and a 57) for APS-C a few threads back.

I thought I was being facetious.

The new Fuji follows in the footsteps of the Konica Hexar AF. I've been waiting quite a while to see this camera. The good news is that I'm going to Photokina tomorrow and will be able to hold it in my hands :-)

I'll very likely be in line when this little gem shows up. However there's still one significant bit of engineering missing. Get rid of the LCD screen!

What do we use these screens for? Adjustments ad nauseam (white balance, ISO...) and 'chimping'. I'm "old-school".. go out into the world, make some exposures, come home and see what you got. Simple, and keeps the eye/brain looking out at the world, not down at the technology.

Solution? JAW. Instead of jpeg or RAW, there's just one type of image file. Call it what you want, but its basically RAW that when downloaded gives you all the choices you can stand, or produces its own 'smart choices' image (like a jpeg) for those photographers that don't want to fiddle with white balance, iso, etc.. Thus, no need for an LCD screen. The camera is then, IMO, more elegant, more durable, and for me at least, much more desirable.

I look at this camera, think it's lovely, and wish it had interchangeable lenses and no OVF. That would make it more or less the same thing as a m4/3 or NEX or the like with manual controls. Perhaps I can hope for that.

The extraordinary enthusiasm evident on TOP is unsurprising, but I do wonder if there is an English-speaking human on Earth who will want this camera who is not one of the regulars around here,

The problem with it being expensive is that the nay-sayers inside Fuji (they'll be there, as they are in any large company) will be able to claim only modest demand for the camera, and it won't really take off. It won't get enough R&D money, it won't get enough marketing money (though whether it needs much is moot), it won't spawn further models or upgrades etc. But if the price is reasonable - say $750 - it could sell hundreds of thousands.

I for one love the fixed lens! 35mm is the perfect compromise. Ideal for snaps in the streets, when you travel, the occasional portraits and even some nature shots when the ligh is just too candy not to. Another great benefit is that a fixed lens will keep dust away from the sensor. As for price, I'm not going to cough up "Leica red blood" to get one, but +/- $1000 seems reasonable.

For me, it makes more sense to have interchangeable lenses.

I want all the lenses you mentioned. No more. Sell it as a kit and I'm in.

Fixed focal length is great. Zooms are the refuge of the indecisive.

I don't want the camera to be as expensive as possible for purely selfish reasons. Being relatively poor I'd like to be able to sell my now ancient 40D and 5D to get a recent DSLR and buy the Fuji.Maybe I'm asking for too much.

Call me names if you like.... this is just a thought.

Yes my first reaction on seeing this camera was WANT ONE WANT ONE WANT ONE.

No I dont want a zoom. And I dont want an indefinitely extended "system" from 8mm fisheye to 1000mm super telephoto either. But your comment about making fixed lens variants ie 85mm 50mm etc just seems a tad cumbersome. Technically I'm sure its possible for Fuji to make the camera cope with say just three focal length interchangeable lenses (classic line-up, say 24, 50, 85 equivalents).

Because you know what will happen - as soon as it is launched there will be a third party market in add-on adapters to stick in-front of the lens. Ugh.

1700 $$$ according to LuLa

I'd love to have this Fuji if I also had a DSLR to go along with it, but I don't. I want just one camera to do it all. Although I use a nifty fifty 80% of the time, I still need a wide angle and a portrait prime. The idea of multiple cameras at different focal lengths could work (I'd want a 24, 50, and 85mm), but I'd still prefer just one body and 3 primes. I'm fine with EVF's; so the optical view finder isn't much of a selling point for me. Luckily for me it sounds like Olympus is working on a pro-grade PEN body and some primes. I'm hoping they just totally rip off this design from Fuji :)

True story, I kid you not ...

I've been having loads of fun shooting my old film cameras lately. Not necessarily because I prefer film to digital (though I do ... kinda). But more because of the aesthetics of the cameras, i.e. nice and simple.

The ~day~ before they announced this camera, I told my wife that what I wanted was a digital Pentax K1000. Aperture and shutter dials. Plain box of a design. Nice and simple.

It's as though they read my mind in designing this camera. I only wish it had a fast 50mm equiv lens on it, but it's a massive step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned.

If you want it to be as expensive as possible, why not just get the Leica M9? Me, I want this to be reasonably priced. Not inexpensive, mind you but not stratospheric either.

Another advantage to the fixed lens is that Fuji was able to put many of the lens elements inside the actual camera body, which dramatically cut down the size of the lens compared to an interchangeable version.

I'm pretty much in no matter what...assuming it isn't $3K.

Dear Mike,

My utterly WAGs?

If it's priced anywhere between $1000 and $1400, it'll do just fine. The Olympus EP1/2 + Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens, about the closest combo I can think of in terms of size and image quality, is around $1,200 (and, no, the Olympus kit 17mm pancake lens, while very nice, is not in the same league).

At $1,500, they're gonna have problems. If it actually costs as much as the Leica, it'll be DOA, unless Fuji can afford to sell very limited numbers at that price. That's market perception, not spec-peeping. A camera that superficially resembles the X1 and is priced the same goes head up against Leica mystique, and it will lose.

pax / Ctein

Is it just me or is there something deliciously mechanical about it - something substantial? I was going to comment on how the exquisit the threaded shutter/cable release button was (sigh),but someone beat me to it.
I agree about the price and variants - I'll have the 35mm and the 85mm please. Er... make that the 50mm and 85mm. Dammit, all three....

you mean 36-e?

Mike, I hate to say it, but I couldn't agree more... :)

If the early interest in this camera pans out, Fuji should just make more variants with different lenses. The company will sell a lot of cameras that way. In order: 85mm-e ƒ/2, 50mm-e ƒ/1.7, 24mm-e ƒ/2.8. And bring a mop to pick up all the money.

Fuji does have a history with that approach in their 6x9, 6x8, 6x7 and 6x4.5 MF rangefinders made with fixed lenses of varying focal lengths. I don't know how commercially successful they were, but it appears that they were reasonably so in the niche market they served.

Regardless, the X100 seems to me to be an altogether different game and much more likely to see success if the online reaction I've read in the last 9 hours is any indication.

It does look like a thing of beauty but is it one camera material? Trouble is I'm a one camera guy, I've always been that way. But man, it's giving me a wondering eye

"If you want it to be as expensive as possible, why not just get the Leica M9? Me, I want this to be reasonably priced. Not inexpensive, mind you but not stratospheric either."

I mean I won't necessarily be unhappy if it turns out to be $1,400-1,700 as opposed to $650-850.

I don't mean I want it to be INFINITELY expensive....


Why do they make a retro camera, where I can set Aperture and even shutter speed by a mechanical dial but they won't make the lens Manual Focus. That is so sad.
The camera is what a lot of people are looking for and I guess also willing to pay for with this one big flaw.
I'll still give it a try when it comes out. Until then I will make good use of my PEN

At $1700 and above, I'd have reluctantly to give up on this digital QL17/Hexar/35-SP equivalent ...

... and wait for the Yashica equivalent which will inevitably follow.

My perfect film setup (classic old school photography) was a Leica M2 with 35mm Summicron plus an SLR with 135mm lens.

If the shutter lag and focus are fast enough, this might be the Leice M2 replacement.

If it's up to it, I'll sell the Canon 35/1.4L to get this!

Conrad, the lens certainly looks to have a manual focus ring.

I'm betting it will be priced at $1000. Maybe $1200 to start. If they have an incredibly good marketing campaign and advertising dollars maybe they can get $1500 but probably not in a large sales volume outside Japan.

I would say my limit on this one would be $1200. At $1000 I would pre-order it to compliment the K5 I plan on purchasing. At $1200, I'd have to look at what Olympus is going to do with their new bodies/lenses.

It's kind of dilemma I'm in with Pentax. I have the full set of DA Limited's 15-70mm, plus the 31mm and 77mm so for better or worse I'm kind of married to Pentax. I've invested a good bit in Olympus (and Panasonic lenses) for M 4/3 so this would have to be priced right for me not to say, well I'd get more with another Olympus lens.

"Look at what this camera is tasked to do. Except for the groundbreaking viewfinder (=expensive), the technology to produce such a relatively simple camera--simple, in terms of its clearly defined role--would not seem to imply stratospheric cost."

Wrong. Look at the sensor technology. Fuji have gone with an eccentric microlens array, as on the the M8 and M9. This requires serious technology development, as Leica can attest.

The amount of engineering and thought that has gone into this camera imply that although this camera might be niche, Fuji's ambitions for the platform are anything but niche.

"But am I the only one who's tired of the 2:3 aspect ratio? It just doesn't seem to suit most of what I want to do but I want to see things in the aspect ratio I'm using. Hopefully Fuji takes a clue from Panasonic and offers other aspect ratios. 4x5 and square, thank you very much. Toss in a wide-ish normal lens, say a 28mm with at least an aperture of f/2, and I might have to start saving up."

The great beauty of this system is that the framelines are projected from the EVF. The menus should allow us to specify our aspect ratio at will: 2:1, 1.7:1, 3:2, 4:3, 5:4, 1:1.

Even at 1:1 (um... YAY!) you're dealing with 8 megapixels and taking only the best part of the image circle, with what the MTF charts indicate is a real scorcher of a lens. That is plenty for a nice big square print.

Dear Mike,

While there are many good engineering reasons for this to be a fixed-lens camera, Fuji has managed to eliminate your “optical viewfinder” argument with their very clever invention. Most of the problems of interchangeable lenses on rangefinders don't apply to this design. Focusing off the sensor, of course eliminates that whole can of worms. Getting the right frame lines and parallax correction is now just a matter of programming. Long telephotos are still a problem because of the mismatch between viewfinder field of view and lens field of view, but the EVF ameliorates that.

If Fuji were to extend this concept to a interchangeable lens camera, I don't foresee any problems. In fact if I were their designers (and their designers are cleverer than me), it incorporate a mildly (2X-3X) telescoping optical viewfinder (easy to design and simple to implement when everything is electronic and computer controlled) just so you could accommodate a wider range of focal lengths without making the users too unhappy.

It will be a marketing and economic issue, not a technical one.

Personally, I'm entirely fine with a fixed lens design.

pax \ Ctein
[ Please excuse any word-salad. MacSpeech in training! ]
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com 
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com 

For those that have missed it; There is a switch to select MF/AF-C/AF-S on the side of the camera.

It's hard to make out in the original pictures but if you take a look at the photos from photokina, you can clearly see the switch.

I am wondering whether the camera will have a focus confirmation dot. One of the reasons I don't get on with my GF1 is the manual focusing system.

Also, could someone please explain why one might want to switch between OVF and EVF? I'm really exciting by the digital overlay for the OVF but my experience with EVF has been woeful.

Isn't this marriage of optical and electronic viewfinders a first? Could that feature alone define an entirely new type of camera?

Hello Mike

Could not agree more with you. what a great news : a camera made for photographers for a change. I would have preferred a 40mm instead of a 35mm but hey that's ok .
a fuji camera with a sony sensor ... hmmm sign of times
only thing in your list I think the 24mm should come before the 50mm ... and I am sure at some point t, there is going to be a demand for black bodies . I bet they are going to sell a lot of those babies


"Also, could someone please explain why one might want to switch between OVF and EVF? I'm really exciting by the digital overlay for the OVF but my experience with EVF has been woeful."

1. DOF preview - on a camera with an OVF!

2. Zero parallax - on a VF camera with a lens that focuses not to 0.7 m, but to 10 cm!

4. High-precision magnified manual focusing in live view.

5. In-finder chimping. (Sigh.)


Maybe those wide-tele adapters will come with "eyes", a la vintage Leica M lenses. (Or in this case "an eye", a la Leela.)

Seriously, though, judging from Stephen Shankland's photos, the optical finder is notably wider than the stock lens. Perhaps all that would be needed is additional projected frame lines, via firmware.

I disagree about the high price bit -- it smacks of elitism. Why make this camera into an exclusive boutique model when it actually emulates the Olympus 35 SP you show along with other cameras from the '60s and '70s like the Canonet G-III QL17? The latter still is an attractive camera because it has a great lens that produces beautiful photographs. Konica, Minolta, Yashica and others produced similar models with terrific lenses that were affordable. If the Fuji does well, I hope it invites price competition from other camera makers so that we all can enjoy your DMD type camera.

This camera will be in the $1500 range, and it will appeal to a lot of photographers who know what it's for and how to use it. 98% of them will have other cameras they use for other purposes, but will turn to this camera because it does what it does better than any other camera on the market. And there are enough folks like that out there to make this a business for Fuji. If they made it a $700 camera, it would be no better than other $700 cameras, and there are plenty of those to choose from already. Fuji is going for best of class (and this is not in the M9 class) all the way, and you always pay for best of class, and there are always customers for best of class. This is a better camera than the Leica X1, so if you deduct the red dot tax from the X1's $2000 dollar price tag, you'll have a price that Fuji can make work.

Thanks Mike! However, despite the love, I suspect it will stay out of my bag for the foreseeable future - invested too much in Canon recently to splash again.

Greetings from Addis

"I'll take the fixed lens to get the fixed viewfinder. Oh, and one more point along those lines: If the early interest in this camera pans out, Fuji should just make more variants with different lenses. The company will sell a lot of cameras that way. In order: 85mm-e ƒ/2, 50mm-e ƒ/1.7, 24mm-e ƒ/2.8. And bring a mop to pick up all the money."

The current VF, to my eyes, could support all of those lenses with different framelines (a la a rangefinder). That would make much more sense. If they have to make dedicated bodies, then a 50mm-e would make a fine follow up, and a 28mm-e could sell, but the market for a dedicated 85mm-e or 24mm-e camera would be, I'd bet, extremely limited. They have a beautiful and elegant solution for dealing with this, so the lack of other lenses feels to me like a missed opportunity.

I am willing to sell my Konica Hexar AF (looks the same as the new Fuji, and probably works even better as regards zone focussing, auto-focus speed etc) with its 35mm f2 lens for $1,700 ... for an additional $2,300 I will supply 5 ADDITIONAL sensor options (Highlighted by one which is an EXACT replication of Kodak Tri-X ... called "Kodak Tri-X") !!

As lovely as it is, it's still just another digital. With an anticapated price tag between $1500 and $1700, it makes the Oly EP2[with the OVF] seem like a very good value.

John, at Fuji's presser a company spokesperson said $1000...

Fuji made the exceedingly well built XPan and XPan-II for Hasselblad, make the lenses on Hasselblad's current H line, and their lenses bow to no one (I measured the one on my G617 at 100lp/mm *in the corners of a 6x17 frame*).

They also managed to squeeze amazing quality out of a 1/1.7" sensor in the F30 and F31fd, so the chances are this camera will have far superior image quality to the m4/3 models.

Styling wise, it looks more like a Klasse W than a Leica. Too bad the rear panel is so busy.

Fixed lens is a feature, not a bug. The kind of people who want a zoom would probably be happy with a nasty tiny small-sensor compact already. It's unfortunate the camera itself is physically so large, however. I found the few millimeters separating the Leica X1 from the Panasonic GF1 made a world of difference in practical take-everywhere-ness.

Am I the only person who thinks that a 35mm lens is not wide enough or not long enough? A 50/1.4 on this bad boy would be a compromise as well but at least you're not stuck with 35's wide angle distortion minus truly being a wide-angle. Maybe I'm just whacked.

"Am I the only person who thinks that a 35mm lens is not wide enough or not long enough?"

Again, I'm glad it's you complaining and not me for once.


"Again, I'm glad it's you complaining and not me for once."

Yeah, but no one listens to me lol.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007