There is not much wrong with Fuji camera bodies. What is poor is the firmware which often takes a year or more of upgrades to get the bodies doing what they should have been doing to start with. As a X100 owner I speak with personal experience of this.
My own experience entirely. Bought an x100 two years ago and for 18 months it was my only camera. The most engaging and enjoyable time I've had with photograhy and best results. A fixed lens really makes you think about things. Have an EX-1 as well now for specialised stuff, though don't like it so much.
40daystogo: The Leica Vario-Summicron 24-90 mm f/2.0 on the D-Lux 5 is an amazingly sharp and compact lens. It's designed for a far smaller sensor. Of course I'm not an optical engineer, but why can't Leica provide a lens like that, scaled up in size for the APS-C sensor? I have previously splashed cash for Leicas including a true M rangefinder, but this f/3.5 widest aperture of the X is a total deal breaker, meaning there is zero chance I would even desire to get it. It is THAT BAD.
Or perhaps they are more interested in images than numbers.
Leica are only following modern business practice. Produce one quality winner and sell a load of tat off the back of it. Why not when people will pay two and a half grand for a red dot? - and they will sell.
Mrrowe8: What asshat is buying this Flaming turd ? Makes no sense , for same price u could buy Nikon d600 .. Or Sony rx1 why would anyone be as stupid as to buy this ? Just cause it says Lieca are people that ignorant ??
Basically agree but I bet the Leica will not throw oil spots all over it's sensor.
Richard Murdey: I was 100 comments in before it dawned on me that the lens was not removable.
So its a Fuji XE-1 with the kit zoom welded to the body and no EVF.
For twice the cost of the XE-1 kit... and the lens aperture is slower..
... exhales slowly ...
Well, this will go over like the proverbial lead zeppelin!
Sums it up nicely
It is certainly the real thing though. Low tech, low spec, high price. A true Leica.
OK. I have owned an X100 for 6 months and am very impressed, particularly with image quality. Even JPEGS. I am keen on low light and night photography and in those areas it is superb - hand held shots at night! It is very portable though not a pocket camera. Much has been written about firmware problems and slow operation but I have not noticed that they have impeded the production of quality photos. I should point out that I do not do sports or wildlife photography for which this camera would be wholly unsuitable. It's horses for courses and buying whats right for you. At least this camera does not pretend to be all things to all men. I admit that I miss a few shots through not having a 70-90mm lens option. I think the X-Pro 1 looks an option I might consider but not the X-E1. Shaving a bit of the size, weight and price is not enough to distinguish it. It should have had a multi-angle rear screen to set it apart, especially considering the loss of the optical veiwfinder.
mcm49. I think you'll find that the Canon Powershot G12 - and its predecessors, have a dedicated ISO ring. so it can be done.
There is too much snobbery in this. On average the instagram and Iphone groups on Flicker have the same ratio of good to poor images as any "camera" group. A few terrific images, many average and poor ones. I note that "Leica" groups are particularly replete with dull and uninteresting stuff. It's a photographers eye that matters not the camera or medium.
These days what matters most in visual journalism is immediacy. With every other member of the public carrying a camera of some sort it is no surprise that photojournos are getting thin on the ground. Most of the newsworthy pictures shown on television and the web, be they still or moving, are from amateurs who just happened to be there. Lack of cinematic quality is no bar if you are lucky enough to be on the spot.