Jump to content

Full frame X100


damienlovegrove

Recommended Posts

I think a full frame x100 is an inevitability. How would you feel if it was launched in Q1 2014? The XF mount lenses and bodies will always be APSC but the X100ff would be an obvious leap for Fujifilm to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Sony are apparently about to launch a "revolutionary" FF Nex camera in August so I guess the CSC FF race will be on in earnest when that happens. I wonder is this is what Canon have been waiting for? Their CSC efforts have been tepid at best so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure all X100s owners would welcome it because of their recent outlay but I do think some XP1 and XE1 users might think seriously about buying a FF x100 either to use with or even to replace their DX cameras. If there was a 28mm adapter as well I think it could be a hit and I might even swap away from my XP1 since I could crop the 35mm frame to 50mm DX equivalent. It would be a particularly useful take everywhere camera. It may well win-over some Leica users and also pros to work alongside their DSLRs.

A year ago when I half-heartedly suggested this as a probability it was laughed at but I think you're right and it is now virtually inevitable.

Vic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Sony and Fuji could be the Canon and Nikon of the past in the same way as Samsung and Apple took over from Nokia and Motorola in the phone market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they came out with a X100 full-frame, keep the 35mm focal length, open aperture to 1.4, and they keep the retro look, it'll be the only camera I'll ever own my entire life, and I'd buy it no matter the price point.

Seriously... I also think it's an inevitable end. Fuji must already be working on something like that. Once they come out with it, it'll be a pretty bold statement to the world and to their competitors. And I'm sure Leica would be stunned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see what affect the arrival of full frame CSC cameras has on the DSLR market both in terms of sales and also innovation. Surely from an innovation point of view it will cause manufacturers to seriously look at whether they continue to use the flappy mirror in all products that are now in the DSLR category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A compact FF X100 type camera with compact lens, fast aperture as in f1.4-2.0, hybrid OVF+EVF, manual dials - will be a killer product. Totally.

How would I feel about it if Fuji released in Q1 2014? I would be ecstatic. I would be like, about time! And pre-order, with deposit down within minutes on seeing the above specs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. as an starting point 35mm FL is probably the most versatile for most.

If fuji were to make fixed lens cameras in diff FL's then people would ask for a 50mm f1.4 or f2.0. Wide shooters would want a 24 or 28mm. And so forth..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. With the engineering and development of the XF lenses as a common standard across their line of bodies, they will not go FF. it just isn't what these cameras are about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. With the engineering and development of the XF lenses as a common standard across their line of bodies, they will not go FF. it just isn't what these cameras are about.

Nikon and Canon both manufacture three different series of lenses for different sized sensor bodies. Are you suggesting that Fuji are incapable of manufacturing two series of lenses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. With the engineering and development of the XF lenses as a common standard across their line of bodies, they will not go FF. it just isn't what these cameras are about.

Nikon and Canon both manufacture three different series of lenses for different sized sensor bodies. Are you suggesting that Fuji are incapable of manufacturing two series of lenses?

There is a difference between capability and resources. Minolta might have been regarded as a very capable camera company, but decided they didn't have the resources to profitably continue to make digital cameras, for example. One has to consider the size and financial strength of the companies concerned. For decades Fuji had a professional presence in some markets, but dabbled on the edges of the mass market, they always seemed "niche" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they will also use the early adopters as beta crash test dummies the way they did with the original X100.

:D

Sign me up. I'll be a beta-tester. Hopefully they have learnt from the X100 and X100S to implement a pretty good V1.0 release.. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not wanting to pour cold water on this idea -- it would probably boil off as steam anyway -- but has anybody given any thought to the size that an X100FF would need to be, especially with people also talking about wider apertures and possibly longer relative F/Ls?

Although the electronics would stay the same size the optics would require more bulk, which means that the form factor that X100 users love so much would be out the window. I'd guess that as a minimum you are looking at a size similar to the X-Pro1. Although a retractable lens could reduce the depth it is unlikely to be as pocketable as the X100.

And look at this thread, if you haven't already

http://www.fujixseries.com/discussion/5027/why-fuji-make-the-x100s-so-beautiful-and-make-the-x-pro1-so-ugly#Item_30

Personally I'm not interested in the X100 or going FF, but I'm looking at this purely as a design exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leica M9 is a FF sensor 35mm camera. And it's compact. So why should a potential FF X100 type camera be any different? the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH is still quite compact but not as small as say the 35/2.0 ASPH. But if you look at the original Leitz 35/1.4 lens it is absolutely tiny for a 1.4 speed lens. Albeit without any aspheric elements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. With the engineering and development of the XF lenses as a common standard across their line of bodies, they will not go FF. it just isn't what these cameras are about.

Nikon and Canon both manufacture three different series of lenses for different sized sensor bodies. Are you suggesting that Fuji are incapable of manufacturing two series of lenses?

Fuji has proved that large-format Fujinons up to 8×10 view-camera format and beyond can be the standard of the world. Its medium-format GX-680 pretty much set the standard for industrial-level SLRs, and its "Texas Leicas" were renowned for their Fujinon lenses. Last time I checked the industrial-level cine and video production lenses on B&H, they listed over 200 individual lenses ranging in price from $2,000 to $160,700. Clearly, two series of lenses is barely worth a notice when they are Fujinons.

However, they must succeed in the chosen marketplace. Fuji has little experience in the consumer marketplace, after more than half a century in the industrial marketplace. I don't really know how the consumer marketplace views the X-cameras, but they have certainly got the full attention of working photographers.

No one who shoots in the industry, buys for prestige. They buy because the camera empowers them to compete. The web is now the prime consumer of photographic products. The X-cameras can easily compete in reportorial work against the best that CaNikon can throw at them. Prints are much more rare, but the X-Pro1 can easily compete with the D800 up to and beyond 16×20. This is not only because of the X-Trans CFA, but also the quality of the Fujinons.

CaNikon continues to produce competent—and occasionally innovative—photographic equipment. Sony ventures outside of the box on occasion, but I suspect that is because they fundamentally don't really understand photography, except from a consumer electronics viewpoint. They have scored big on occasion, but they are a deeply flawed conglomerate from a management point of view. Far too often Sony cameras are more commodity digital devices, than cameras serving shooters. I wonder if anyone in Sony actually understands lenses other than as a brand to help sales. Fuji has needed more than a decade to get their digital act together, but now seems to be clearly the leader in innovation and the ability of their best minds to bring the ideas to the consumer and industrial marketplace.

They are not a boutique store like Leica. They do not charge thousands for a red-spot to attract collectors who never take the camera out of the box. They offer a series of cameras that are nothing like the CaNikon tradition and very separate from the m4/3 cameras. The cameras are distinctive—if you don't like them, there are clear alternatives. Like CaNikon, they are building a whole spectrum of cameras and lenses from entry-level to pro-level. With my background, Fuji has checked a whole lot of boxes, but I would be the first to say, they are not for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not wanting to pour cold water on this idea -- it would probably boil off as steam anyway -- but has anybody given any thought to the size that an X100FF would need to be, especially with people also talking about wider apertures and possibly longer relative F/Ls?

Sony RX 1 Full frame vs X100s size comparisons

Leica M (FF with viewfinder) vx X100s size comparisons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuji has little experience in the consumer marketplace, after more than half a century in the industrial marketplace.

And there was me thinking that they were one of the major suppliers of film to consumers for decades. Silly me. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a full frame x100 is an inevitability. How would you feel if it was launched in Q1 2014? The XF mount lenses and bodies will always be APSC but the X100ff would be an obvious leap for Fujifilm to make.

Damien, I am interested in understanding what you personally believe the benefit of going FF and what is already an almost perfect camera? to eek out that little bit more DoF? enable larger printing? In my view the output of the X100 already has a very special 'feel' to it, and have always had an internal conflict over whether FF is necessary.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not wanting to pour cold water on this idea -- it would probably boil off as steam anyway -- but has anybody given any thought to the size that an X100FF would need to be, especially with people also talking about wider apertures and possibly longer relative F/Ls?

Sony RX 1 Full frame vs X100s size comparisons

Leica M (FF with viewfinder) vx X100s size comparisons

As I said, in a bit you didn't quote, I'd expect an 'X100FF' to be about the size of the X-Pro1.

Leica M (FF with viewfinder) vx X-Pro1 size comparisons

As for the RX 1, if many people here want an X100 without a viewfinder I'll be extremely surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuji has little experience in the consumer marketplace, after more than half a century in the industrial marketplace.

And there was me thinking that they were one of the major suppliers of film to consumers for decades. Silly me. :D

Not to mention all those bridge, superzoom or whatever cameras that almost scared me off buying an X-E1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...