Just Posted: Fujifilm X100S first-look preview

I had a Fuji 690 (and the electronic 645). Fabulous cameras with superb lenses and viewfinders. But the 690 suffered from a serious problem; it was not possible to get the whole of a landscape in sharp focus due to the shallow dof even at the smallest aperture. Sensors can be too big.
As for the unending resolution of MF, yes it's over 5 times higher than 35mm film but my D800 extracts more res than the 690 with Provia or Velvia and the colours are far better.
Fuji should concentrate on releasing a very high resolution 35mm digital rangefinder based on the 645 that is free of the usual gimmicks (face recognition, scene selection and all the usual useless clutter). They wouldn't be able to make such a camera fast enough.

No. They never publicly admitted the problem, treating it as a warrantee repair. Fine for some, but leaving me with a $900 paperweight (paperwork was in a bag that got stolen). Also makes the 2nd user market a minefield too.

Truth benders like rusticus above let their loyalty and love of the camera get in the way of the real truth, never supplying a link to the official announcement of the problem and fix when challenged to do so.

Contrast that with Canon, who still fix original 5D unstuck mirrors issues without question. Their problem, so they fix it.

"A Canon spokesperson told CPN: “We offer our most sincere apologies to customers using this product who have been inconvenienced by this issue. Going forward, we will spare no effort in our quality management to make sure our customers can use our products with confidence.”

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/eos_5d_mirror_repair.do

If Fuji acted like this I'd buy their nice cameras with the same confidence I buy Canon/Olympus

I must say, although I love this concept of camera, that Najinsky seems to be true to me. I've gone through many discussions where "in-siders" said : only those cameras s/n up to 11xxx are wrong, then they had to admit : up to 12xxx, then 13xxx - but - they said - no more, but 14xxx came inevitably too. Now they say that from s/n 21xxx it is OK, but ... . If nothing else, this history tells that Fuji did not solve this problem a whole year and never said a word about this problem. That's why I am careful now to see the same lens on X100s. It is a pity, because I love this concept, but I cannot compromise with quality.

35mm equiv is much more useful and in sync with tradition as the x100s draws inspiration from classical rangefinder cameras.
I think Fuji made the right decision to stick with the 23mm.

How shallow do you need to go??
There's a lot more to photography than impressing the kids with the ohhs and ahhs of how out-of-focus most of your image is. Of course, for subject separation and creative imagery, being able to achieve a narrow plane of focus is great, but not every picture needs to be shot at F/1.4

Sure, but the 23mm lens entirely removes that option (it has no significant OOF) , whereas a 50mm equiv is still very flexible.

"35mm equiv is much more useful and in sync with tradition as the x100s draws inspiration from classical rangefinder cameras."

That's a matter of opinion and most classic rangefinders were 42-50mm.

Itsastickup, this is exactly how I've felt since the introduction of the camera. I would have dropped $1200 in a heartbeat for a 50-equiv. The 35 FOV is great for some, but a choice would have been nice.

Those who are happy with the 35-equivalent lens seem to be under the impression that the rest of us aren't allowed to wish for something else.

People seem to forget, when a 35mm was the "standard" for street photography, it was actually 35mm. Those lenses could still give a reasonable DOF-effect if asked nicely (just look at the Sony RX1). 23mm precludes this almost entirely, unless you're taking macro shots.

Maybe there's more to photography than shallow depth of field, but most of the shots I've ever seen from the X100 look like they were taken with a point and shoot, thanks entirely to the lens.

Oh, and HCB's favorite lens was his 50. ;)

P.S. - Add a 0.5x converter for a 50/25 kit, and I might never need another camera again. One can dream.

itsastickup - You can still get shallow depth of field with the X100...you just need to focus on a close subject. Still, I know what you are getting at. I have never liked the idea of being limited to one focal length...which is why I bought the XPro:)

If there are no 50mm fixed lens cameras then how can we know what the market really is since no one can buy one? Are you assuming that the manufacturers are right? In any case it's obvious enough that I am not the only one in the market for a fixed 50mm (equiv) lens. And let's be clear: a fixed 50mm equiv large aperture. 35/2.8 would not be enough.

Could you please link to a resource for good Lightroom 4 settings? I have not found one that works better than the internal JPG, yet.

There is a road map for the lenses, that was published a long time ago.
As long a Fujifilm sticks to this time table I don't see any need to complain.
The road map can be found here: http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xf_lens/roadmap/

Andywhoa, is it really necessary to be insulting to respond to what was a fair comment?

As it stands, your comment is unmistakably unfair. Fuji long ago laid out their lens roadmap and they have completely adhered to it. Your comment suggests not introducing new cameras would speed up their roadmap, which is entirely illogical.

I fail to see what your ethnicity has to do with it!

I'm a white X100 owner and I'm still jealous.

;-)

"The lens hasn't been prone to SAB since 2011."
It is certainly Not my case (and not only mine). I bought X100 in 03/2012 and I had to return it due to SAB after a 1/2 year and ~3000 clicks. I want to hope that Fuji did revise the design or manufacture inspection, but I'll be careful.

03/2012 means that most likely you still had the camera with old design produced in 2011.
Check your original camera serial number.

But I hope you don't think, that the manufacturer is not responsible for every sold camera, whenever it is sold a/o manufactured? Nobody knows the precise numbers of defective cameras, but internet echo of them was - in my opinion - a bit stronger and longer in time than is usual for every new model.

For 1300 I by an ICL camera, not a fixed focal length. This camera is worth 800$, and that is high priced. Compare Olympus Pen series, Pana GX1, Sony Nex series and you look at this. The times we pay for a name are over. All it needs now is a blue dot to make a reason to pay so much for it. Remember Fuji introducing the S5 for 3200$,naked body. The day they stopped producing it, they scavenged their stocks and sold it for 750$. So, this gives you an idea what it is worth. Bought mine new at that time for 620 euros, and for that price it was to take without any doubt.

Shamal- add a high quality f2.0 lens to the micro four thirds camera and the price goes up. On top of that fuji gives you not only an evf but an ovf too and hybrid mode to boot (the only one so far in the entire world)

I really think some people just want something for nothing.

They didn't. Out of warranty. That kind of sucks when you know this is 100% product design issue...

They fixed mine for free too. I didn't even bother to show proof of warranty I just checked the box on the form.

They fixed mine 8 months out of warranty without the slightest hassle at no charge.

It doesn't have to be a product design issue. I was told by Fuji that it was a quality control issue. This could mean a poorly made part, bad batch of lubricant, assembly problem...

Borisk1 - How do you figure the resolution is the same....the Sony is a 24MP sensor, the Fuji is a 16. They both have fixed lenses with 35mm equivalency so on any given final image the Sony will always have more resolution as both cameras depict the same FOV.

The greater pixel density of the Fuji is irrelevant when you can't change lenses....the FOV of the two cameras is the same.

$1300 vs $2800 is a notable difference for sure, but closer to half the price, not a third or a quarter!

X100S has OVF and EVF. In order to have that on RX1 you need to pay extra $450 for EVF and $600 for OVF. So in total we have $3850 vs $1300, just about one third of the price.

onlooker

You are conflating 2 different issues to distract from the fact that the sensor deserved to be in the premium camera. The XE 1 is barely a month old in some places yet they managed to develop a new sensor in that time.

To rub more salt in the wounds they now have a 'coming soon' sticker on their website under X system/ Do they really hold the pro users in that much contempt. .

It's not over-priced. It is a kick in the teeth for XE-1 owners though. Fuji would have been prudent to delay these cameras until at least March, but CES and CP+ proved to much to resist I guess. Still, anyone who buys a camera in the first 3 months after release deserves to get burnt like that, can't say I have any sympathy.

I guess they put the new sensor in x100s not x e1 cos they want to put a clear distinction between different generations of the system. The x e1 is probably put in the first generation as was meant to be the cheaper version from the x pro. Just like the x 20, the x f1 did not use the same x trans as now in x20.

Too bad for the XE1 owners then, guess they'll have to quite taking photos and wait until they can get their hands on the next camera that will make everything sooo much better

The XE1 is not "the premium camera", its the budget model with basically identical performance to the X-Pro but without some of the features, most notably the hybrid viewfinder, which is part and parcel of this series. The X100 was the leading edge of the X-series and it makes perfect sense for it to get the upgrades first as its first in the development cycle. This is a kick in the teeth to no one - by that logic there would never be any advances in camera tech.