The Photokina 2010 winner so far: Fujifilm Finepix-x100

Fuji did surprise everyone with the new Finepix-x100 camera. Previous rumors indicated a new Fuji m4/3 camera, but nothing was even close to the real x100. The initial feedback from the online community is very positive. Was it so difficult to figure out what consumers really want? How comes that Fuji got it right from the first time? We still have to see some reviews, but I think this camera will be a winner. Some more details:

Fujifilm Finepix-x100 promo video after the break:

This entry was posted in Fuji and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • hgjs

    I’m bummed I won’t be able to afford it. 🙁

    • Harold Ellis

      X1 have no optical viewfinder so it is no deal for me.
      Besides, all leicas are way overpriced for what it offers, it is Apple of photography world

    • Montevale

      If the specs and the lens deliver on the promise. This may become the backup camera. Indeed $1700 is steep for this type of backup. However there is no one at this time has this thing and the first adapters rule of paying the premium certanly applies here.
      On the other hand there are also ton of people who don’t shoot anything but prime, so there is certanly a market there, but at 1700 I can almost get a full frame d700 (kind of apples and oranges here, but price wise for the money I sure would go full frame instead).
      Wonder who else is coming out with something like this, there is a reason M9 is 8 grand – lack of competition… actually no competition at all for a full frame rangefinder so lets gloat and make a titanium verson to gouge even more… 🙂

      • Al Kay

        Remember that when you buy the Fuji for $1700 in four years its value will be zip, nada, a goose egg. The right Leica, such as the new Titanium M9, may be worth twice its price in the relative near future, and the lens, of course, will lose little value. So, is it over-priced? I bought my 1954 Leica M3 twenty-five years ago used, and I still use it. The image quality is a good as it gets.

  • pavel

    “How comes that Fuji got it right from the first time? ”

    It didn’t if the price is indeed $1700. People wanted this kind of camera for a long (I did) but as an everyday camera, instead of small-sensor PnS and as addition to SLR. So, priced accordingly. $500 would be an OK price. Anything above that is absurd.
    Sure, they will still sell it fine even for higher price but with better price tag, they would sell tons of them.

    • Ian

      This is a great camera, but wanting $500 for it is absurd. It is easily worth $1200.

      • hgjs

        Guarantee you they could make a lot of money selling it for $500. What, do you think this thing is made of gold? They could sell a ton which means their production costs would be much lower. Instead they’ve decided to play it safe and just try to sell a far smaller amount (which means much higher production costs) but charge a huge premium (pricing similar to a Leica X1). Still, either way it will sell and make money- though since they’ve decided to limit it to the affluent I hope it turns out to be a problem plagued piece of crap. This camera is what a ton of people have been wishing for- but will not be able to afford because of the high price. Here’s hoping the Panasonic GF2 will be just as interesting- and not as over the top when it comes to pricing.

        • Kevin

          stop being naive. most consumers can’t figure out how to use aperture priority, let along manual, and that severely limits the addressable market size of this camera. it will never sell a “ton” if it’s priced at $500, it will simply mean less money made.

          it’s time for you to read up an economics textbook.

          • hgjs

            You need to get a clue about economies of scale. And yes, this camera COULD be a big seller. Have a look around the blogosphere and the largest photo websites. People are more interested in this camera than they are the D7000! It’s an exciting camera.

          • carl

            @kevin, agreed. add to that its fixed prime lens (no zoom! the horrors!) and its market is limited indeed.

        • Kevin

          “since they’ve decided to limit it to the affluent I hope it turns out to be a problem plagued piece of crap”

          just from that sentence, i can tell you’re bitter, miserable and poor. i feel really sorry for your life!

        • Thumbs down! Why so negative? I hope this camera will be a best seller… In that way in the future Fuji could try an interchangeable lens system based on this experience.

          • hgjs

            Who is negative? I’m positive Fuji could sell a lot of these for $500 and probably make far more money than if they sold a few for $1700. 🙂

        • Fuji has some pride. That price tag ensures a very high quality product, not one that was mass produced with low version control.

          It’s a fair price for the technology going into this thing, EVF, regular viewfinder, not sure if the speed of the lens could be faster, but hopefully that will be solved with higher priced options in the future.

          • Montevale

            I agree on the speed of the lens – why the heck f2?
            make it 1.4 at the least and if the lens is at 1 or lower then the $1,700 price tag would be much more in line.

      • pavel

        How is it absurd? It’s a nice camera but after all, it’s just the same thing like Nikon P7000 or Canon G12 where they exchanged the zoom for larger sensor. It might look prettier but it doesn’t cost anything more to make. DSLR with same size sensor sells for as little as $300, including zoom lens. 35/1.8 lens sells for <$200.

        I read the whole discussion and pretty clear that people think this is great camera BUT its price. And that's all what I was saying – people will be interested in the camera but will buy it only if the price is right. And $1700 is at least $1000 too much.

    • If Ferraris were $500 they’d sell tons as well…

      • Dasher

        It’s not a ferarri, it’s a Kia. Fuji does not really have any kind of reputation in this field and they are measuring themselves vs the Leica X1 now, out of the blue.

        • Photomic

          >Fuji does not really have any kind of reputation in this field

          Making cameras?

          you may not be aware but the renowned 35mm Hasselblad Xpan was a rebadged fuji, and even the new medium format Hasselblad H series are all fuji products. They even make excellent large format lenses.

          I think that they have enough reputation in the field 🙂

        • e6zion

          BTW, guess who manufacturers the Leica x1…… Fuji… Fuji’s optics are impeccable too. Their medium and large format lenses were easily among the best–I loved ’em.

        • Stepper

          Fuji is definately not the Kia of the camera world. BUt I agree that they should not base their price on the X1. The fact of the matter is that if there is a red dot on the camera then it commands serious coin.

          I say $1200.00 for the X100 would still be steep but reasonable.

          • Richard

            I think anything over $999 takes it out of the competition with the “advanced P&S” cameras such as the G12 which sells for half that amount. Even at $999 it is overpriced when compared to the Canon Rebel lineup. At $1.700 it is plainly a niche product. It may be a nice camera, but will be of little impact at that price point.

            When someone makes an APS-C body roughly the size of a Leica M8 with a dedicated series of compact lenses (and adapters to take other lenses) at a mass market price point I will take notice because it will make an impact on the market.

            Nice as the Fuji camera may be, I think it misses the point.

          • Jay

            I agree; I think that $999 – 1199 would be a great price point for this camera. And like some others, I would love to see an interchangable lens option. Hell, it wouldn’t hurt my feelings if it were Leica screw or M-mount compatible!

            If Fuji can build this camera with the attention to detail, fit finish and of course, image quality it should have, then it will be a winner, even with a fixed lens. After all, Sigma continues its DP series cameras and has announced a 3rd model.

    • Antonio Rojilla

      Just because you can’t afford it? Come on! I agree with the Ferrari comment: that you can’t afford something doesn’t make it a worse product. It’s your live or your job what could get some improvement… 😛

      I’ve been dreaming of a camera exactly like this (give or take a few small details) that I thought I was still dreaming when I saw the news! I even have sketches of my dreamed camera! LOL!

      So I have to agree this is Photokina’s winner (well, there can be surprises still), even if I didn’t like it because it is completely different from anything else. Yes, the D7000 seems to be an amazing DSLR that will hurt any other company, but it’s still just another DSLR. This thing is awesomely unique.

      • hgjs

        The thing is, he and me and a lot of other people could afford it- Fuji could sell tons of this thing for $500 if they wanted. But instead they’ve decided to go the Leica route and sell a small amount at a huge markup to elitist tools who get off more on how expensive and exclusive their camera is.

        • Antonio Rojilla

          This camera won’t sell in the millions like a D3100 and that alone makes the camera more expensive.

          Even if it was sold at $500 sales would be very low because it won’t attract so many buyers because of the design and the fixed lens. Maybe if they sell more units than expected the next model could be cheaper .

          But hey, you can buy the Nikon equivalent for just… oh wait! That’s the point: this is a new market, and a very narrow one, so the risk is very high. So far there is only a similar camera, the Leica X1, and it has less features and will provably cost more.

          • BornOptimist

            Epson R-D1, Sigma DP1, DP2, DP1s, DP2x – there are plenty other, so no Fuji has not only X1 is not the only similar camera.
            As far as I know – they haven’t sold THAT well. Fixed lens makes it a nice-camera, and most ppl will find it not that interresting.
            They can sell some thousand, but far far from a million. Same camera with an interchangeable lens – that would have had a wider audience though.

          • hgjs

            I don’t think this camera has quite the limited appeal that people keep saying. The Panasonic GF1 sold with the prime lens is far more popular than that sold with the kit lens. And for a lot of people that is the only lens they use. Now the general wisdom has been consumers will take a zoom over a prime anyday. The general wisdom could not be more wrong in the case of the 20mm f1.7 and I think it would be wrong with this camera. It could be a big seller. Consumers aren’t as clueless as you might think.

          • Antonio Rojilla

            @BornOptimist None of the cameras you cited are comparable: they either lack a viewfinder (let alone an hybrid one) and have no classic controls (all those DP) or are a true rangefinders with a lens mount (the RD-1, not on sale BTW), so I don’t know whats your point.

            It is what it is. If it had a lens mount, it won’t be the same camera (and BTW, the viewfinder would have to be way different and either a mess or way more complex or expensive AND the lens couldn’t be made to perfectly match the sensor and its offset microlenses).

            @hgjs It is not a GF1 by a big margin: it’s got a fixed lens. Period.

            There are currently dozens of zoom cameras and small system cameras (GF1, EP2…), please go get one of those and let the rest of us enjoy this marvel.

          • hgjs

            “please go get one of those and let the rest of us enjoy this marvel”
            Ah, I see, it’s exclusivity you’re after. Enjoy (over)paying for this “marvel”. I’m guessing if it was priced under $700 you wouldn’t give it a second look- but price it at $1,700, and it’s a “marvel”. 🙂

          • BornOptimist

            @Antonio, you can say that 10 times, and maybe you will start to believe it. It is a nice looking camera yes, but it’s not a first camera in a new market. It is a new camera in an existing market.

  • Alfons

    Wow! My heart skipped a beat when I saw the photo and read “Fuji”.

  • lorenzino

    1700 $ = 1700 euros, for some unknown reason. That is way too much. If that is the price they could produce a less “sturdy” model for less in the future, and sell it for less money, no? Design alone can’t worth 1000 dollars more than the competition (and, except from Leica, I am thinking about the Ricoh GXR with A12 module, that I criticized so much for its price… now it looks cheap!)

    • Dasher

      $ + Taxes + VAT = €

      That’s why we pay more

      • Blargh

        … of course, Fuji is an american company produced in the USA, that’s why you have to add taxes+vat to the dollars price, right? ……..

        Coming from japan, no excuse for a 200/300 euro diference.

        • BornOptimist

          That’s probably not what he meant.
          If the price is given in $ this is without tax/VAT, while in £/€-sone it is common to give the price incl tax/VAT.
          If you want to import a camera from US to Europe, you have to add tax/VAT to the $-price (it doesn’t matter which country it’s made, it’s about in which country it’s sold).

          • lorenzino

            That’s true. It must be said that in many USA states taxes are 5% circa, while (e.g.) in Italy they are 20% of the whole sum.
            So if (hypothetically) a Nikon D7000 costs 1200 $ and 1200 €, the final 1260 $ will be still less than the final 1200 € we have here. Although now the € depreciated a bit…

          • PhilW

            @ lorenzino
            In the USA it is a simple matter to avoid State sales tax.
            Here in Los Angeles the total sales tax is 9.75%.
            If I order the camera from out of state (Amazon, Adorama etc) then I can receive free shipping and pay no sales tax..

  • cc

    It’s a camera that created its own market, it will cost a lot until competition arrives to drive prices down. Within a couple of years, these cameras will be much more affordable. I suspect that samsung will come out within a few years with a similar camera, they have a knack of entering new markets quickly.

  • NiknWontRepairMyGray

    $1700? thanks Fuji for reminding me that I’m poor. 🙁

  • WOW! FINALLY! I really hope the EXR-tech will work in the raw-files to, that would be awsome!

  • chrisq

    still don’t understand how a non interchangeable lens camera can cost this much, would understand 700-850 though.

  • jeorcal

    winner ? how it can be possible that such a thing wins anything ?

  • justin

    gorgeous camera, but if it’s 1700 i rather pay the extra 2oo for the for the red dot.

    • Don’t forget the X1 don’t have this extraordinary NEW thing: an electro-optical viewfinder. That’s a big point.

      Whatever: here a fast first contact review of this beauty… wrote in spanish by a great specialist:

  • sporty883

    Surf over to – close 39% think the x100 is the most exiting product announcement for Photokina. Followed closely by the D7000.

  • Martin

    What I still don’t get: This nice x100 got an OVF and an EVF? I would take the OVF and be glad. What’s the benefit of an additional EVF, besides making the camera more expensive?

    • With the electro-optical viewfinder you have the better of two worlds in one (for example you can see a histogram in your optical viewfinder). Or you can choose one or another (for example if you want to check the deep of focus in your viewfinder or to make a macro seeing exactly what the sensor sees). That’s just great and revolutionary!!!!

  • K. Artur

    Lovely camera. Sadly, no zoom. I mean a normal, bright zoom, not one of those dim 20x gimmicky monsters…
    It should have an interchangeable mount, then it would RULE, and bury everyone (and Leica) in their socks…

  • Carlos R B

    1700usd is expected and not affordable unfortunatelly….

  • usf

    wakeup zeiss! make the digital ZI with M mount! (or G:) )

  • don’t get me wrong, the stats on this camera are great, and the styling is beautiful. but for $1700 i’d much rather get a D300s (or d7000 for that matter) than this fixed focal length camera. i mean if it had any zoom range (even 35-70) that would make it seem a little more worth it at least in my eyes. (if i’m wrong and it does have interchangeable lenses please let me know, but until then I don’t see who would look at buying this for $1700)

    • Todd H

      I agree… The moment I saw this, I wanted one. it looks beautiful. I really hope they got the price wrong… I love Fuji, but near 2G’s for a fixed lens, with no possibility of changing it out? that makes me not interested… I see how they are trying to possibly compete with the X1, but… give me the 35-70… or at least other prime lenses, 85, 50mm?

    • Just A Thought

      Just because it has a fixed lens does not mean that you cannot get different focal lengths from this camera.

      Just screw in a 2X Telphoto optic to the front of the lens and you have 46mm f2 equal to about 70mm f2. With the front mounted adapters there is no light loss like with rear mounted tel-converters on DSLRs.

      If you want wider just screw on a wide angle adapter. Want a fisheye then just screw in a 0.15x fisheye wide angle adapter.

      A couple of lens adapters would give one a variety of focal lengths. Front mounted lens adapters are relatively small in size.

      I’m sure that Fuji could produce high quality adapters to expand the range of focal lengths for the camera.

      It might also have a digital zoom – using smaller portions of the sensor. A camera for Sports Shooters – no. A flexible and viable walk around camera – yep. Besides there are way more tourists than sport shooters available to become customers.

      • and why wouldnt those tourists turn to a more economical non-dslr (ie: nikon p7000 for $500 or some canon powershot)

        i just dont see the market they’re shooting for here; the professional photographers who want a really expensive little camera to stick in their pocket when they walk around town?

        i dont know about you but if i don’t bring my dslr i’m willing to accept the fact that i’ll be using a point and shoot.

        • Just A Thought

          If the Nikon or Canon Top Compact sells for $500 and this Fuji sells for around $1,000, I suspect that a lot of people will pay the extra $500 for the larger sensor and lets not forget the wow factor. Maybe in over taxed EU countries the Fuji will end up costing $1700, but I kinda doubt that it will sell for more than $1,000 in North America.

          It’s nice to see something different instead of the same old same old

  • Peter

    very very nice, love the lesn, love the design, love the concept, love the viewfinder, love the nd filter, hate the price :D.

    But still… the 1700$ is not final and not at all official, hop it’ll be below 1400$.

  • Cheong

    FYI, Japanese listed price is usually marked up too…
    A Nikkor 105mm f/2 DC is listed about 150000 Yen

  • Camaman

    So is this a full manual cam only?
    At least some varian of the P mode would be a kost velcomed fature.
    Maybe PASM is in the menues… Hopefully…:/

  • Strippy

    Beautiful, but too expensive. Any rumor on FinePix S7 Pro?

  • Nobody Special

    The finder system is the point to this camera – new technology that with some imagination could be trickling down or up to new camera designs, if it ever has interchangeable lenses, it’s a much better and justifiable purchase. It’s more of a Leica X1 sales drain because of it’s design/looks at this point.

    But I’d have to agree that the Nikon 7000 represents a better overall value even it is an older style design it just can do more for less in a well built package….IMO.

  • Bearz

    For the quality & technology don’t expect to pay discount store prices, it ain’t a Casio!

  • Sergey

    I would buy this if it had a micro 4/3 lens mount. Even at $1700. But fixed lens? Come on, Fuji!!???

    • Discontinued

      Agreed for a lens mount (not necessarily 4/3 though),

      I really don’t get the excitement. There must be a “oh-it-i- a-retro-design, now-get-really-excited-gen” missing in me. All one really needs to do is to slap a 24mm lens on ones DX-body or a 35mm on a FX and you can take just any picture this 1,700$ fuji is capable of …

      It would be amazing to see a rangefinder with interchangeable lenses – some other than Leica’s M8/M8.2/M9. If Voigtländer came up with something affordable, FF and digital, taking all their lenses from 12 to 90mm, now that would get me excited.

      35mm equivalent only ? ? ? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz …

  • Leica User

    If this thing turns out NOT to have the shutter lag of the X1 and point and shoots, it could be a game changer, and well worth the price. In any event, it’s nice to have more competition in the EVIL market. Maybe someday we’ll have he holy grail for under $7000.

  • hgjs

    Falk Lumo is at Photokina and he asked the folks at Fuji how much this camera will sell for. They were hesitant to give an answer but eventually said $1,000 as a ballpark number. I think this $1,500 to $1,700 is bogus.

  • Gareth

    this looks very interesting.

    Just need to see how it performs wide open at iso2000.

    no-body else seems to think this is important.

    i need a small camera that performs well (better than anything small available now) at high iso’s.

    the oldskool iso dial is a great idea if it’s Great at iso 2000 and very good at iso4000. otherwise i will sorely miss all of those little stops in between.

    why is it f2

    because almost no-one who is not very good with a camera will be happy shooting f/1.4. I am pretty sure they don’t want complaints from people who don’t know how to shoot f1.4, and i’m sure a lot of those people will buy this camera.

  • Back to top