Fujinon X100

David J. Littleboy wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:

The fixed lens seems to allow custom 'fitting' the sensor to compensate
for vignetting?

I don't think so.

Here's the page about the sensor:
http://www.finepix-x100.com/x100/custom-aps-c-sensor
-it looks like the microlenses are positioned differently across the
sensor, not straight above each pixel but aligned to accommodate that
one specific lens, and perhaps not so much at close focus or differing
apertures. I agree it's not necessarily a special sensor but the
microlens arrangement is unique!


I think that this is simply Fuji's MO: over the years they
have produced a zillion film cameras with fixed, and killer quality, lenses:
the GW690/GSW690 (which went through 3 generations), a horde of 645 cameras
(the GS645S's 60/4.0 lens is the sharpest (and worst bokeh) lens I own)

Bad bokeh is a likely outcome :-(

OK, I had not checked that page about the lens:
http://www.finepix-x100.com/story/
-eight elements in six groups just like the Nikon 35/2:
http://www.camerarepair.com/Used-Cam.../35mm-F2-P284/
-but a very different arrangement and extremely close to the sensor,
only 5.6mm away, also with a molded aspheric element. Reading closer,
they say it's optimized for MTF at f/4 to f/5.6. Also this Fuji is DX so
it's more like an FX equivalent of f/2.8, optimized for f/5.6-f/8 which
is pretty boring and nothing special in low light. That's why I'm
thinking it's really more useful as a classic P&S for mom & pop busy
with a gaggle of toddlers than a deluxe rangefinder art solution. It
could be a must-have for reporters though.


including both MF and AF models and one with a zoom, and the current folding
6x7 camera.

Oh yeah I forgot about that new retro film camera:
http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigt...dih7jzkae.html

35mm equivalent is great for a do everything lens, except shallow DOF
effects. If it's $2000 I'd rather have a 50/1.4 equivalent. I'd get one
immediately if it's $500 :-)

I much prefer 35mm equivalent to 50mm, so it'd be just right, hereg.

But just as I didn't get the 6x7 folder, I probably won't get this one,
either. The 5D2 with the Voightlander 40/2.0 pancake lens is adequately
compact for my needs.

True, and I use the equivalent, but this is certainly smaller and much
more subtle where you might not want to have people gawking at a 'pro'
camera. It would fit easily in a coat pocket. But still, with an
FX/pancake setup, people think I've got an old film camera or something;
it's a lot more low key than even an entry level DSLR with a kit zoom.

Paul Furman wrote:
-but a very different arrangement and extremely close to the sensor,
only 5.6mm away, also with a molded aspheric element. Reading closer,
they say it's optimized for MTF at f/4 to f/5.6. Also this Fuji is DX so
it's more like an FX equivalent of f/2.8, optimized for f/5.6-f/8 which
is pretty boring and nothing special in low light.

I expect it will still be pretty impressive at f/2. While it may be
a stop or two behind a full-frame DSLR for available light in theory,
it might be a bit easier to do low speed handheld shots in practice.

That's why I'm
thinking it's really more useful as a classic P&S for mom & pop busy
with a gaggle of toddlers than a deluxe rangefinder art solution. It
could be a must-have for reporters though.

It could be an amazingly good travel camera too.
If it has a three digit price tag, then I'm very interested.

Peter.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:55:38 +0000, Bruce wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:

The fixed lens seems to allow custom 'fitting' the sensor to compensate
for vignetting?

I don't think so.

Here's the page about the sensor:
http://www.finepix-x100.com/x100/custom-aps-c-sensor
-it looks like the microlenses are positioned differently across the
sensor, not straight above each pixel but aligned to accommodate that
one specific lens, and perhaps not so much at close focus or differing
apertures. I agree it's not necessarily a special sensor but the
microlens arrangement is unique!


The use of offset microlenses isn't unique at all. It was pioneered
by Leica in the M8 digital rangefinder camera, and also appears in the
M9. Other manufacturers use it too, for example Sony in the NEX
series of mirrorless system cameras.

Without offset microlenses on the sensor, there is a need to use
near-telecentric lenses to make the image. Otherwise, there will be
significant light fall-off increasing with distance from the lens
axis. The use of offset microlenses means that lenses that are not
nearly telecentric can be used, especially legacy lenses from film
days. Hence Leica's need for microlenses in the M8, M8.2 and M9.

Obviously, in a camera that accepts interchangeable lenses, the
offsets of the microlenses have to be arranged to suit the majority of
lens designs rather than one particular lens as with the X100. This
means that some lenses work better than others.

Good explanation, thanks Bruce.

On 12/20/2010 3:09 AM peter spake thus:

Wrong! I am your worst nightmare. You only hope I will go away.
NOW! You prejudiced asshole, let us all know what you mean when you talk
about my genetics and communism.

Well, you're not *my* worst nightmare, but if it helps, I also hope
you'll go away.

Please.


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 09:33:48 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:

Having perused the X100 site, what are your opinions on this camera's
spec and design goals? http://www.finepix-x100.com/

(It's not a D/SLR, to be sure, but worthy of discussion)

1) Some highlights:
CMOS APS-C 12.3 Mpix
ISO 100 - 12,800.
FFL 35mm (35mm equivalent) f/2-f/16 lens with built in shutter (1/4000)
and ~3 stop ND filter (can be retracted or activated). Macro to 10 cm
(ratio not stated).
All manual controls for exposure settings - including aperture control
on lens and +/- 2 stop exp comp.
OVF and EVF, switchable in use w/o removing eye from VF.
"Mechanical" shutter release - even uses mechanical shutter release cable.
records 1280x720 HD video and stereo.

Hotshoe with control pins (probably "Nikon-ish").

2) There may be an ergonomically ingenious feature here for the exposure
mode:

set aperture and speed manually = M exposure
set aperture manually and speed to A = A pri
set speed manually and aperture to A = S pri
set both to A = P

Did such exist on any film cameras? (I have no idea if that is the
intent above, but it seems natural).

My Nikon F-801s had such an arrangement. I presume that so too did
other Nikon cameras of the period.


3) Raw button: I assume this means that if set to normally capture
JPG's, can be commanded to capture or save a particular image in raw as
well. This could be a boon for travel shots where most may not need raw
storage, but occasionally a shot is so wonderful that full detail should
be captured.

4) Limitations:
Fixed lens, fixed FL.
OVF off lens axis - though at 35mm (eq) this won't matter much except in
closeup/macro.
Shutter speeds seem to be in full stops (at least on the manual control
- there is an "A" on the speed dial presumably for A-priority or P mode,
assuming it has such)
-not clear if there are half (or third) stops on the aperture control -
likewise an "A" mode for shutter priority or P mode?

5) The style is somewhat retro, which will appeal to many. I like the
mechanical controls: I can see exactly what the speed/aperture are w/o
turning on the camera (note: I'd have to remember the ISO setting...).
The exp comp on body is likewise of value in this respect.

In sum, I like it, but would have preferred it come with a lean line of
prime and or limited zoom range lenses - a 16mm, 85mm f/4 and 135mm f/4
for example would have made a good travel kit.



Eric Stevens

On 12/20/2010 8:01 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 06:07:44 -0500,
wrote:

:
: Uhm! you keep using the term "plastics," without differentiating. You
: have described your own characteristics.
:
: NOW! You prejudiced asshole, let us all know what you mean when you talk
: about my genetics and communism.

You're beating a dead horse. He doesn't know why he used the word "genetics";
it just came tumbling off of his fingers. As for "communism", he only dimly
understands what it once was and seems even more clueless about what it has
morphed into in China. A "communist" is what a right-winger calls anyone to
the left of him when he can't think of anything else to say.


I have seen enough religious slurs such as his to be sensitive to them.
This is not the first posting of his that contained a reference. e.g. a
prior, in context reference to New York people. My question/comment is
intended to clear up any doubt.
If what you say is true I will admit I am wrong. Though I doubt I will
have to make such an admission.

--
Peter

On 12/20/2010 2:29 PM, Bruce wrote:
Grimly wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember peter
saying something like:

NOW! You prejudiced asshole, let us all know what you mean when you talk
about my genetics and communism.

Really, who gives a ****?


When stridently demanding an answer from someone, calling them a
"prejudiced asshole" is perhaps not the best approach.

Peter is best ignored. Peter is what kill files are for. ;-)


Blustering and ignoring facts is what kill files are for. Just continue
your blustering, brucie.

--
Peter

On 12/20/2010 10:54 AM, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember peter
saying something like:

NOW! You prejudiced asshole, let us all know what you mean when you talk
about my genetics and communism.

Really, who gives a ****?


Anyone with a sense of decency.

--
Peter

Bruce wrote:

The FujiFilm X100 will be the 2011 equivalent of a 1970s/80s Japanese
rangefinder camera such as the Canonet G-III QL17, Olympus 35RD and
SP, Yashica 35 GS/GT, Konica Auto S3, Minolta Hi-Matic F/G etc., etc..
It is aimed at exactly the same target market.

So wait 35 years and I can pick up a nice one for £25 on ebay...!

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

Bruce wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:

The fixed lens seems to allow custom 'fitting' the sensor to compensate
for vignetting?

I don't think so.

Here's the page about the sensor:
http://www.finepix-x100.com/x100/custom-aps-c-sensor
-it looks like the microlenses are positioned differently across the
sensor, not straight above each pixel but aligned to accommodate that
one specific lens, and perhaps not so much at close focus or differing
apertures. I agree it's not necessarily a special sensor but the
microlens arrangement is unique!


The use of offset microlenses isn't unique at all. It was pioneered
by Leica in the M8 digital rangefinder camera, and also appears in the
M9. Other manufacturers use it too, for example Sony in the NEX
series of mirrorless system cameras.

OK, interesting, I knew that was some kind of issue with the legacy
Leica lenses. Still the backfocus of 5.6mm seems crazy close so this is
probably more fussy and might not be suitable for interchangeable
lenses. There sure isn't any competition with a compact 23mm f/2 lens...
really that is quite impressive, especially if it'll be priced for
general snapshooter's use!


Without offset microlenses on the sensor, there is a need to use
near-telecentric lenses to make the image. Otherwise, there will be
significant light fall-off increasing with distance from the lens
axis. The use of offset microlenses means that lenses that are not
nearly telecentric can be used, especially legacy lenses from film
days. Hence Leica's need for microlenses in the M8, M8.2 and M9.

Obviously, in a camera that accepts interchangeable lenses, the
offsets of the microlenses have to be arranged to suit the majority of
lens designs rather than one particular lens as with the X100. This
means that some lenses work better than others.