The X100s is far a better camera than the X100, but...

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
itairom Regular Member • Posts: 436
Re: The X100s is far a better camera than the X100, but...

cptrios wrote:

palincss wrote:

I don't get it. In view of this: "Wow. What a better camera it is. Faster in every possible way. AF now caught my kids as fast as any camera. Manual focus is a dream." why wouldn't it be a "keeper"?

Not worth all of the extra money, perhaps? It costs around twice as much as a used X100 right now...definitely not chump change.

I too am a bit reluctant toward the X100s in IQ terms. The X100's RAW files have a bit of unquantifiable "magic" that the X100s's (OK seriously, they should have chosen a different letter than "s!") lacks. The X100s's IQ is definitely better in plenty of other ways - high ISO being the biggest - but the prospect of giving up that je ne sais quoi is kind of sad. The X100s is undeniably a better camera mechanically, though.

I'd like to see a comparison that demonstrates this difference. So far, I haven't seen one. I'm not saying that it's not true, just that I wonder how much of this is simply nostalgia and how much is really a visible difference in the images. The use of terms like je ne sais quoi leads me to wonder if it's really just nostalgia. The X100 was a remarkable camera that revitalized photography for a lot of people, so I'm not surprised that people find they still love it even after its 'replacement' hit the market. That kind of emotional connection tends to manifest itself in ways that are hard to quantify. It's still a great camera.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow