Planar1280 Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 And specially Professional DSLRs. It is priced at 1899 and does not have interchangeable lenses. Is there a reason I should Buy a Finepix F100 over a 1500$ DSLR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 If you want interchangeable lenses, versatility and don't mind the size of a DSLR, then there's no reason not to buy a DSLR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argote Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 There are three main reasons one would buy an X100: You want the smaller size / more discrete look. You REALLY like the design. You have plenty of disposable income and want a new toy. Otherwise a DSLR will serve you better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted July 21, 2011 Veteran Share Posted July 21, 2011 The lens in the x100 it's at Canon's or Nikon's prime level, and that sensor its the SAME used in Nikon D700. Every review states that the x100 beats in image quality behemoths like Leica M8 and X1. It's competely silent and portable, meaning, it's the first real affordable rangefinder in the market. Now, most neowin members dont know their photography history, but rangefinders are extremely useful cameras for press or documentary works. Or just street photography. It actually has the best noise levels on the market. But you know, since members here (wont mention names) think that DSLRs are the end all solution for everything, I will let them know why this camera sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Surely you don't mean D700 and definitely not D7000. Both have completely different sensors compared to X100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planar1280 Posted July 21, 2011 Author Share Posted July 21, 2011 yes I can agree on noise level it is very good but if it had the option of allowing optical zoom I would agree I would even buy it but isn't it digital zoom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted July 21, 2011 Veteran Share Posted July 21, 2011 Surely you don't mean D700 and definitely not D7000. Both have completely different sensors compared to X100. Sorry, brain farted there, it's the D300/D300S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draconian Guppy Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 But you know, since members here (wont mention names) think that DSLRs are the end all solution for everything, I will let them know why this camera sucks. Bit late to post, but don't you think Sancti, you too are taking the same stand with X100 is the end all, non-plus-ultra? In end everyone shoots with whatever they're comfortable with?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted July 30, 2011 Veteran Share Posted July 30, 2011 Bit late to post, but don't you think Sancti, you too are taking the same stand with X100 is the end all, non-plus-ultra? In end everyone shoots with whatever they're comfortable with?. No, because I will never shoot a portrait studio session with it, for example. Or a product piece. The x100 it's fantastic for street photography or journalism or casual portraits and I defend it as that. I agree that everyone should shoot with wathever they find comfortable, but I've read certain comments by members here (not only at this thread) saying that the x100 just plain sucks because it's not a dSLR. That is a lie. The x100 it's a fantastic camera if you use it for what it was intended to be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o0moonman0o Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 if u are ok with a single focal length then x100 is quite a good package. dunno if it beats out a m8 in lower iso department, it is 1.5x vs 1.3x after all and trying to compare it to a m8 that does not have any AA filter is kinda o-O. i put money on m8 is better in lower iso range! and plus any (probably) leica modern prime excells against the prime on the x100. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted August 1, 2011 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2011 if u are ok with a single focal length then x100 is quite a good package. dunno if it beats out a m8 in lower iso department, it is 1.5x vs 1.3x after all and trying to compare it to a m8 that does not have any AA filter is kinda o-O. i put money on m8 is better in lower iso range! and plus any (probably) leica modern prime excells against the prime on the x100. The iso was already compared by dpreview and the x100 won. Of course the m9's prime it's better, it's a Leica afterall, but according to reviews it's not that much better and the x100 beign les than a quarter of the leica's price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o0moonman0o Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 The iso was already compared by dpreview and the x100 won. Of course the m9's prime it's better, it's a Leica afterall, but according to reviews it's not that much better and the x100 beign les than a quarter of the leica's price. o-O care to link to dpreview comparison between x100 and m8/9? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted August 1, 2011 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2011 o-O care to link to dpreview comparison between x100 and m8/9? Yep, let me search for the specific page, dpreview reviews are huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted August 1, 2011 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2011 I cant seem to find the part in dereview's comparing the x100 with the M8, Im starting to think I've red it somewhere else. In the meantime, look at this: http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm_FinePix_X100-vs-Leica_M8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted August 1, 2011 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2011 And here you go, in snapsort they even claim the x100 really outperforms the m9 in many levels. Of course this is not a fair comparison since the m9 has a much larger sensor and interchangeable lenses, however it does indeed shows that the x00 it's quite a piece. http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm_FinePix_X100-vs-Leica_M9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o0moonman0o Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 that snapsort comparison is really o-O lol.. especially how they claim cmos > ccd for quality. we all know medium format digital are all ccd... lol@ image quality part.. how? and even funnier on long exposure, we all know m bodies has bulb, it can definitely do longer than 30 secs. and some pixel peep sample on how m9 can reach medium digital back quality http://inzite.smugmug.com/photos/1196914482_uxTKu-O.jpg http://inzite.smugmug.com/photos/1177883097_8Jv9B-O.jpg raw -> jpg, LR conversion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted August 1, 2011 Veteran Share Posted August 1, 2011 Yeah, some of those points are... lets just say peculiar. I've given up in searching dpreview, Im pretty sure now that I saw the comparison in another page. However, I've used both cameras and own an x100. The picture quality and noise performance it's amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts