Reading mode: Light Dark

X100 is a rangefinder camera!

Go to last post
I

ixo

Senior Member
Messages
1,822
Reaction score
53
Location
Beverly Hills, US
The single difference is you don't have the split image focusing but that's really it.

The form factor is the same, the viewfinder doesn't blink off like an slr when taking a picture, you can see outside of the images frame when composing a shot, it has no slr mirror, etc,etc...

Just because the focus system is not the same split image focusing as a traditional rangefinder camera does not mean the x-00 is not a rangefinder.
 
The rangefinder focusing system is what defines the rangefinder system. The other features you mentioned are less important than this one feature alone.
Mediahound said:
The single difference is you don't have the split image focusing but that's really it.

The form factor is the same, the viewfinder doesn't blink off like an slr when taking a picture, you can see outside of the images frame when composing a shot, it has no slr mirror, etc,etc...

Just because the focus system is not the same split image focusing as a traditional rangefinder camera does not mean the x-00 is not a rangefinder.
Click to expand...
 
It IS a rangefinder focusing system. It's just doing it electronically.
Photohobbyfun said:
The rangefinder focusing system is what defines the rangefinder system. The other features you mentioned are less important than this one feature alone.
Mediahound said:
The single difference is you don't have the split image focusing but that's really it.

The form factor is the same, the viewfinder doesn't blink off like an slr when taking a picture, you can see outside of the images frame when composing a shot, it has no slr mirror, etc,etc...

Just because the focus system is not the same split image focusing as a traditional rangefinder camera does not mean the x-00 is not a rangefinder.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Maybe it would help you think about the terminology problem if you imagine yourself to be MacGyver and your problem is, you need to lob a projectile a certain distance to hit the bad guys on the head. You could ascertain what that distance is ( find the range ) if only you had a rangefinder. Which camera are you going to grab for that job, a Leica or an X100?

If you ever have an opportunity to visit a preserved battleship, check out the gun turrets closely. The little doors with mirrors inside them on each side of the turret (which look like little ears) are the two ports of the rangefinder. Sometimes they have two, one for short distances and one for longer distances.
 
When you look through the optical viewfinder on the X100 are you looking through the lens?

Nope, the rangefinder.
 
you are making indeed a simple mistake: the finder of x100 is really a viewfinder
a rangefinder is just a term to design focus mechanism

a rangefinder uses images from two different point of views to estimate distance from subject, and thus focus (that's basic trigonometry, the trick here is to adjust well all the mechanical elements needed, that's why good rangefinder cameras are expensive)

fuji x100 uses contrast detection on captured image to estimate focus (a bit like a dslr that uses phase detection, and like every compact) So it doesn't care at all of the distance, it just estimates contrast on the sensor and thinks that max constrast means picture is in focus (which is a good approximation, but does not work on contrastless scenes)

a third way to do AF is to measure the round trip time of a beam to estimate distance. This is the traditional AF on old compacts (and on some recent digital compact cameras I think). Usually an infrared beam is used.

To complexify a bit things, X100 already has the components to become a true rangefinder: it is indeed able to overlay what the sensor sees in the viewfinder (but never does it: it just overlays bright frames or closes viewfinder to display EVF). One can easily imagine a small part of the picture from sensor overlayed on OVF, and the user would turn the focus ring to shift and make coincide both pictures edge.

But for the moment it is just a simple viewfinder, that can overlay a lot of information, and that's quite good in itself!
 
Focus is determined as the point in which the image shows max contrast (according to some formulas). Distance to subject is inversely estimated according to lens position on focusing.

Contrast detection, as well as DSLR's phase detection, has nothing to do with rangefinder focusing.
Mediahound said:
It IS a rangefinder focusing system. It's just doing it electronically.
Click to expand...
Have you ever used a rangefinder ?

Best regards,

M

--
Mauro

http://www.maurobenphoto.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbenphoto
 
Mediahound said:
The single difference is you don't have the split image focusing but that's really it.
Click to expand...
by your definition, a brick is a camera, because the only difference is that it doesn't take pictures.

a rangefinder is, by definition, a particular kind of focusing mechanism. the X100 does not have one of those. the X100 is not a rangefinder.
ixo said:
The form factor is the same
Click to expand...
in which case, the little fake camera toys that squirted water out a hole in the front when you pushed the button are also rangefinder cameras.
ixo said:
Just because the focus system is not the same split image focusing as a traditional rangefinder camera does not mean the x-00 is not a rangefinder.
Click to expand...
in short, what you're saying is that just because it is not a rangefinder, it's a rangefinder.
--
depscribe
some pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/depscribe/collections/
 
This proves that the X100 is indeed a rangefinder.
jchapuis said:
X100 already has the components to become a true rangefinder: it is indeed able to > overlay what the sensor sees in the viewfinder (but never does it: it just overlays > bright frames or closes viewfinder to display EVF).
Click to expand...
 
If a camera doesn't have a true rangefinder, with a mechanically coupled RF focusing mechanism, then its not a RF

X100 has focus by wire design and no RF mechanism so its not a rangefinder

Have you actually owned a RF camera before ? I highly doubt it from such a dumb thread

The X100 does have a RF like shooting experience, but saying its a RF when its really a point and shoot AF camera that just happens to have an optical finder is a waste of time
 
Remember the source of this thread, same guy that started a thread saying the X100 is better than the M9

Because he owns and compared both ? No

Because he looked at Steve Huff's website and even though the M9 is clearly the better camera (assuming you can get past the $8000 or so price premium) filled a thread arguing how the X100 takes better photos, which anyone who's owned both can tell you isn't the case, and even if you don't own either, you can still easily see that from looking at sample photos

12 meg X100 does not outresolve the amazing per pixel sharpness of the M9 with its 18meg sensor

23mm f2 Fuji lens while good, is not as well corrected or sharp edge to edge as a Leica 35mm Cron, nor does 23mm on APS-C give you the same subject isolation ability as a 35mm lens on FF

X100 is good, make no mistake, but to better ?? No

I sold my M9 and now shoot a X100, and I'm quite happy, but its sure not better even though I do like $8000 back in my wallet
 
People say the Leica sensor is so good but didn't they actually have some issues with it looking purple? Also, it's not even made by Leica, it's made by Kodak...
 
We have had this discussion many times in the past. Show me one Fuji press release labeling this cam a rangefinder and I will agree. Fans have argued that the X100 is a SLR also. It is a large sensor compact camera.

Fuji's press release calls it what it really is.

PHOTOKINA 2010, COLOGNE, GERMANY, September 20, 2010 - FUJIFILM Corporation is pleased to announce the new FinePix X100, a high-grade digital compact camera featuring an APS-C CMOS sensor, a Fujinon 23mm fixed focal length lens and a newly developed Hybrid Viewfinder, due for commercial release in early 2011.
 
Mediahound said:
People say the Leica sensor is so good but didn't they actually have some issues with it looking purple? Also, it's not even made by Leica, it's made by Kodak...
Click to expand...
Well, for whatever reason (I can't believe they just forgot) they didn't put the IR cut filter on the M8 sensor, but they did with the M9.

To say the X100 is as good or better as the M9 is a bit rash. The question isn't whether the M9 has better IQ than the X100 but whether it has $8K better IQ. I believe absolutely it does not. The difference is significant only to pixel peepers and those who need photogravure-quality prints.

As for whether the X100 is a rangefinder, I think we can just say, "rangefinder style," and leave it at that. It's sure rangefinder enough for me. ;)
 
Thanks for that info.

The X100 is definitely better than the Leica M9 in terms of high ISO performance, shutter quietness and price tag.
lbjack said:
Mediahound said:
People say the Leica sensor is so good but didn't they actually have some issues with it looking purple? Also, it's not even made by Leica, it's made by Kodak...
Click to expand...
Well, for whatever reason (I can't believe they just forgot) they didn't put the IR cut filter on the M8 sensor, but they did with the M9.

To say the X100 is as good or better as the M9 is a bit rash. The question isn't whether the M9 has better IQ than the X100 but whether it has $8K better IQ. I believe absolutely it does not. The difference is significant only to pixel peepers and those who need photogravure-quality prints.

As for whether the X100 is a rangefinder, I think we can just say, "rangefinder style," and leave it at that. It's sure rangefinder enough for me. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Mediahound said:
When you look through the optical viewfinder on the X100 are you looking through the lens?

Nope, the rangefinder.
Click to expand...
No, you are looking through a view finder window. Just like a Canon Gx, or a whole host of cameras.

The range-finder is the prism driven split focus alignment system a-la Leica.

Your best arguement is that the camera does this "electronically" rather than mechanically. Even then it isn't doing it "through the viewfinder" - rather it is doing it via the AF system buried in the bowels of the camera and merely "reporting" that information in the OVF or EVGF (without particular accuracy on the little scale, or consistency, I might add).

The X-100 is a "viewfinder" camera with electronic AF. That's as close to accurate as you'll get - toss in the "hybrid" part for when you "are looking through the lens" when the EVF is turned on, and you get an appropriate description of this "new kind" of camera.

If you're pulling our leg, the joke's on us. If not, you're flogging a dead horse.
 
ixo said:
The X100 is definitely better than the Leica M9 in terms of high ISO performance, shutter quietness and price tag.
Click to expand...
And an F-16 has better climb rate, top speed, amament, and price tag compated to a 747-400. But if your mission is to haul 300 people to Hong Kong, you'll probably do better with the 747. Horses for courses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top