white shadow: The X100s is a reasonably good camera for casual use and perhaps for travel. Some like the " Leica look alike" look because they couldn't afford the real McCoy Leica M. It is a fairly good camera to take casual portraits. That's about it.
A full frame DSLR is still the more versatile camera if one is serious about photography despite its heavier weight. It will deliver the goods expected of a professional photographer or for those who engaged them to shoot.
Similar to a Micro 4/3 camera, it will remain a camera for casual use or for collectors who like the look. For practical casual use, the Ricoh GR may be better. For sheer convenience, the Lumix LX7 is surprisingly very useful despite its much smaller sensor especially in low light.
Casual, but with style ;)And it's not about how bit - it's about how versatile and well-developed.
MarcMedios: All good (and an excellent quality) except for the lack of interchangeable lens. Who wants to take pictures with just the one lens that some anonymous designer chose for you in Japan?
Who wants to swap lenses all the time? For that I got DSLR. This is suppose to be simple and brilliant travel camera.
Vizio Virtù: I'll never understand for what reasons people are so enthusiastic about these crappy mirrorless cameras. OK, they look nice but image quality - especially skin tones and skin texture - is so bad.
...and without it is impossible to see.
Well, these are quite old, from times before EFSC got widely adopted.
Still though - I'm quite sure issue you have is in technique, not an actual physics, if you are unable to get razor-sharp shots with 5D mkII - or perhaps it's just lenses?
Either of these cameras given right conditions is capable of exceeding NEX7 capacity, even more so as NEX7 got rather poor sensor in terms of resolving details, even for an APS-C camera (it doesn't really stand a chance against Full frames according to the independent reviewers). Mirror vibrations got nothing to deal with that if these are results you see - as said: you can't change physics, and these tell that both these DSLRs are capable of delivering sharper photos than NEX7 (whatever mirror vibration disadvantage is there gets neglected by larger sensor area and pixel pitch) - besides, as said, mirror vibrations is applicable only at certain shutter speeds - if you shoot faster or slower a difference between shots with MLU (no vibration)
Jonavin: It has it's quirks but I love my X100S because it's so darn fun to use. Photos from it still surprise me. I've taken more shots with it this year than I have with all my other cameras combined in the past 5. It's always inviting you to pick it up and take some shots, and results don't disappoint.
What cameras you suggest got poor quality and awkard controls? DSLR? I would argue with that.
Nishi Drew: Today I saw a total of 40 X100 cameras in the used shelf in a camera shop, and half of them the limited black edition... hope the people that used to own them just went on to the X100s, but I do wish the used price for the X100 would drop with so many available as second hand
Northgrove - you haven't seen a slow lens if f/1.8-4.9 is "uber-slow" for you.
"that doesn't stop me from walking around with it in a jacket pocket all day" - I walked with a DSLR + 50mm prime in a pocket of my winter jacket. Can't see what it proves, really. Aside from the fact that DSLR can be portable camera if your brain isn't stuck on a perception of "DSLR=big".
I guess you got old DSLRs. Modern are very good with absorbing mirror slap and EFSC really does make a difference. Besides - even old DSLRs got issues with mirror slap only on a certain exposure times. And not all of them (eg. SLTs don't move their mirror).
Zoran Krnjajic - welcome to the website that concentrates on photographic equipment.
DaveE1 - it'd be enough for him to buy FF DSLR with some good, dedicated glass. Perhaps also color checker if he is so concerned about skin tones (but that's useful with any camera - even P&S).
SuvoMitra: Yes, well done, Fuji. Nice cameras and great support. I've stayed with the classic X100, which is a different camera now with FW 2.0. Also, the WCL-X100 is amazing if a 28mm equiv is sometimes preferable, without loss of quality. For me, the X100+WCL functions as two different cameras that do different things in combination with other cameras/focal lengths.
awelch100 - you can't cheat physics. Changing optical design of a lens with a converter or using adaptors to fit it on a different bayonet always screws it's image quality. Whatever it's noticeable for you or not - it's a different problem. Never the less: I am right. There are many reasons for that - additional glass elements, imperfections in construction, misalignments, decentering, etc. etc. Whatever adapter is dedicated to one lens or not - doesn't matter much. It's still an alteration of original lens which brings down an optical quality.
bigdaddave: Yes I'm sure it's very nice and fun to use, but even that one picture of the dark haired woman shows the camera's severe limitation, a fixed semi-wideangle. It's nowhere near the best focal length for that shot and is already distorting her image
Quite how you can all blub over a camera with such limitation in 2013 is beyond me.
bigdaddave - zoom vs prime. We had this debate for long long time in early '00s. Everything what was to be said on that topic was already said, and nearly nothing changed. Same arguments still apply.So if you want to talk about it - dig out some ancient forums. No reason to dismiss one type of lenses or another.
mike kobal: thanks for this nice write up, Mr Brittonthe X100s and GR my absolute fav cameras of this year - getting shots I wouldn't be able to get with a dslrhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j35F9w2D5xc
Harder or not - it's perfectly doable. Besides - you can always pick up one of these tiny DSLRs, like 100D. It'd be more than capable of taking any shots like you did in there.
mark finn: Since I'm still on the original X100 I guess I would have to call it my gear of the last two years. While the 35mm was initially limiting, I soon began to see in 35mm frames, and once freed from the endless decisions about zooming I was able to concentrate on getting the elements right within that frame. The result has been more published photos in two years than my previous seven with Canon and a range of L zooms.
lol, so you buy mirrorless that's horrific to use with tele lenses to replace a DSLR that you use mainly for long focal lengths? Talk about lack of sense.
moimoi: A crazy expensive camera with the horrid X-trans sensor (raw conversion still produces artifacts), no thanks...
Problem with Lightroom is that it actually gives results that are sub-pair to Bayer sensors.
Ian SS: Some people may not agree but carrying my black X100 has certain photographic satisfaction, it's fun taking snaps with it. I use Canon, Nikon DSLR and Hasselblad, carrying these cameras felt like doing jobs rather than having fun enjoying walking around town talking pictures, it is something that will sink in slowly but once you get the feel, it is wonderful!
It's all about approach. I love shooting with X100 as much as I do with a DSLR. Heck: I would argue that shooting with DSLR is actually more fun and satisfying (TTL OVF) - but never the less X100 is an outstanding camera that gives lots of pleasure and does what it's suppose to do in an excellent way.
IDK - black X100 looks worse than a silver one. I guess people realize it eventually and drop it for a silver one. Or upgraded to X100s.
"without loss of quality" - there's no such thing. Each adapter or converter means a loss of image quality. Of course it depends on what you can accept and what's the quality of converter, but never the less - you cannot say that there is no loss of quality. It's against laws of physics.
You must realize that if you would have longer FL - it'd be equally limiting only in different situations (eg. landscapes/travel).Meanwhile this, shorter focal length allows for smaller lens what is a great benefit to this body.
X100 is a perfect proof that compacts do better job as a travel / walk-around camera than any compact system camera out there.Well done Fuji!
I love when people measure quality of cameras by amount of shots made with them.
NCB: Price: all things are relative...
For around the same price you could get a Leica X Vario. Fixed lens (28-70 equiv zoom) APS-C compact. No grip. No viewfinder. Limited external controls.
Nice camera in its way but I think the Df is vastly better value for money.
"But why bring it up? " - because you claimed that one needs to spend $4k to approach optical quality of Leica - which clearly isn't the case.
"it's really pretty obvious when looking at photos" - yes, seen them, shot myself with M9 and still disagree. Yes, it's an excellent gear, no doubt about that, but it's certainly not as good as you think it is. You're a classical example of confirmation bias I'm afraid.
Ingloryon: Nex-6 + metabones speed booster would give me a better "pure photography" experience at half the cost.
NEX + "pure photography" - buahaha, what a BS. That electronic mirrorless toy got as much to deal with purity of photography as it does with toaster.