Jump to content

Full frame X100


damienlovegrove

Recommended Posts

It's the user base that matters not Power Brands. The average age of a Leica customer is likely to be mid 50s while a Sony customer is likely to be mid 20s. The brands are generations apart. Fuji has kept it's youthfulness. My daughter loves her X10 and used it to get her GCSE in photography. I can't imagine her ever using a Leica or even knowing what one looks like. She will probably use my X-Pro1 for her A levels.

I'm not arguing with you Damien - but I am always surprised at the apparent strength of the Leica brand, when they score very highly in those international brand surveys. I would have regarded them as rather "niche" - but clearly people out there have heard of them or know who they are.

I am surprised at your comment about Fuji being "youthful" - my perception from forums and seeing people out and about is that the X cameras had a more "mature" user base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm sure they are niche. And that's the point. They can demand these prices for very good equipment that in many cases may well be little more than jewellery. Sony however can't. I saw the rx1 as a Mia guided attempt to get some of the leica halo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand your points Artuk. good ones they are too :)

Just a few thoughts on the current theme...

Power brands include Bentley, Cartier, Aston Martin etc. Everyone's heard of them but the ownership base is microscopic in market share terms.

I agree about the age of Forum users. I doubt if the 'yoof' would ever go near this place. If this was a Facebook group it would have a younger readership for sure. Of the 8.3 million digital cameras that Fuji sold in 2007 I guess the customer base was primarily young. They are now ready to upgrade.

I'd say that Sony, Fuji and even Olympus are just as big camera brands to the next generation of photographers as Nikon and Canon have been to us.

I remember when Fuji made '120 roll film' compact cameras with fixed lenses. They were niche but so well respected. As a company Fujifilm have proved time and again they can create a new product for a market that didn't exist before they invented it.

I'm off to shoot some frames with the 27mm pancake lens on my X-Pro1.

Great discussion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to turn this all on it's head a little bit: assuming it was possible, who thinks a full frame x100 is a good idea anyway? What would it bring to the table for you that the current size sensor doesn't?

(Remember full frame only means a sensor comparable in size to 35mm film; completely different mediums - it doesn't make it any more or less pro (imo))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno, if it means better images at higher ISOs in lower light than it would be interesting to see what they come up with. I honestly think digital is still in it's infancy, and it lacks character for me. I'm more interested in seeing what the organic sensor will be like. I think that's when things will start to get exciting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would really float my boat is for someone to develop an FF sensor/processor module that could be implemented as a retro-fit for film M's, something along the lines of the DMR back they made for the last of the Leicaflex's. Progressively upgradable to keep up with the technology. How coool would that be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I do think that will happen one day, and when it does it will be amazing. A bit like the leaf backs for hasselblad on a smaller scale or something. Imagine if they could develop a device the size of 2 film canisters that could work across the back of the shutter curtain that you could snap into the back of any 35mm film camera. haha dream on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I do think that will happen one day, and when it does it will be amazing. A bit like the leaf backs for hasselblad on a smaller scale or something. Imagine if they could develop a device the size of 2 film canisters that could work across the back of the shutter curtain that you could snap into the back of any 35mm film camera. haha dream on!

Actually, a while back I read somewhere an article about a group of guys who tried to develop such a thing. Unfortunately they didn't get much further than the research phase, at the time the obstacles proved to difficult to overcome when considered against their projected market share and the R&D costs. Shame really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the M's would be a better candidate than most other 135 rangefinders because of the flip-up door holding the pressure plate. Removing that would leave a readymade window for the sensor/LCD assembly without compromising the rigidity of the camera's chassis, and replacing the removable base plate with perhaps a slightly deeper one would allow for any additional space the electronics might require.

But yeah, market share would probably never let you recoup R&D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to turn this all on it's head a little bit: assuming it was possible, who thinks a full frame x100 is a good idea anyway? What would it bring to the table for you that the current size sensor doesn't?

I would seriously consider one when it came time to replace the X100s. I would not be rushing out to buy one on day one but several years down the track if the X100s is still being used as often as I use it now then yes it would suit me fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the film camera market is too small now for there to be a market for retrofitting digital to 35mm. Technology has come a long way and a lot of the film lenses are sitting in dusty boxes. I would like one though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been some attempts at making digital backs for 135 cameras, with zero success. Smooth integration of shutter/aperture system to digital sensor is not possible, fitting all the electronics and batteries into a compact back is also not possible. All the film advance mechanics are there for nothing, that space in digital cameras is packed full of electronics. A digital back 135 would be big, clumsy, slow, prone to alignment and dust problems, expensive. Forget it.

There will be no FF X100. Full frame is not needed anymore for good (enough) IQ. We are getting traditional 20-24 MPix quality form a 16 MPix APS-C sensor and excellent Fujinon lenses. Market for a bigger "X100" is minuscule in reality, not worth approaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced. As I say, I think Sonys is as much a marketing and technology flag planting exercise as anything and they have the cash and ego to do it. Practically and profitably I think it's a failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also kind of adds more to my reasoning for it existence. It'd be more of a photographers camera with the VF and more in keeping with its Fuji inspiration.

From what I read Sony simply said that model range doesn't have VFs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who cares about the Sony R

From what I read Sony simply said that model range doesn't have VFs

Bollocks. That's b/c Sony engineers weren't clever enough to design a hybrid VF. Fuji are a lot more innovative than Sony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the user base that matters not Power Brands. The average age of a Leica customer is likely to be mid 50s while a Sony customer is likely to be mid 20s. The brands are generations apart. Fuji has kept it's youthfulness. My daughter loves her X10 and used it to get her GCSE in photography. I can't imagine her ever using a Leica or even knowing what one looks like. She will probably use my X-Pro1 for her A levels.

But what will she use for her degree? Maybe the full frame X100 ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If money is no object like some Joe Public do (rich Chinese Nationals hang Leicas on their necks as though they are jewellery), then they can buy it without understanding.

Slightly OT but I heard today from a guy who sells Leicas in Australia who says Chinese tourists often come in and buy 3-5 Leica bodies at full retail price in one hit.

Not surprised. They have nothing more to brag about and since they cannot hang their cars around their necks, the camera would do fine thank you. The one thing I hate about the Chinese Culture (I am Chinese) is the obsessive need to brag and show off material wealth as though having more toys means better life. Show off is one thing...to obsessively do so is too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the user base that matters not Power Brands. The average age of a Leica customer is likely to be mid 50s while a Sony customer is likely to be mid 20s. The brands are generations apart. Fuji has kept it's youthfulness. My daughter loves her X10 and used it to get her GCSE in photography. I can't imagine her ever using a Leica or even knowing what one looks like. She will probably use my X-Pro1 for her A levels.

I wish Singapore has A levels photography course...restrictive education system we have here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So a ff Fuji assuming it has a VF would necessarily be EVEN more expensive.

I think the RX1 price does not reflect the technology inside it. A Ni

Who cares about the Sony R

From what I read Sony simply said that model range doesn't have VFs

Bollocks. That's b/c Sony engineers weren't clever enough to design a hybrid VF. Fuji are a lot more innovative than Sony.

Sony fit EVFs to many of their cameras. However, I do remember some statement from Sony about the RX1 not having a viewfinder in line with matmaber's comments. Of course, there is an accessory one of very high resolution, but it adds further to the expense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...