4 ms·

Gotcha. Now this is an argument that I was expecting. I was very seriously looking at the x100 when it came out. Precisely because it was styled to be a manual

Gotcha. Now this is an argument that I was expecting. I was very seriously looking at the x100 when it came out. Precisely because it was styled to be a manual rangefinder. I tried it, but I just didn't like the compromises. It felt like the rangefinder was a bit of a gimmick. The manual focus grid was non existent. I loved that it was compact, but the quality wasn't quite up to the full frame, similar priced breatheren. The only argument for it was the weight and compactness, which to me didn't matter all that much. What I really wanted was a CCD insert for my olympus rangefinder (35 rd, poor man's noisy leica) However I suspect that ship has sailed.

lb1lf 10y ago
-Agreed on the X100; I tried one (An -s)for a few weeks, but found myself constantly comparing it to a 'real' rangefinder, probably not fair to the poor little thing, which IMHO is an excellent little camera, though a bit lacking in the manual focus department. I've found - to my surprise - that I much prefer Sony's focus peaking when it comes to digital manual focus aids. It is responsive, accurate and much less obtrusive than I initially thought it would be. Still no beating a proper rangefinder, though (IMHO). Oh well. It is my day off, it is lovely autumn weather outside and I've got a few rolls of Tri-X and Portra to expose. (In the Texas Leica - google the Fujica G690BL for a chuckle if you're not familiar with it) Would love a CCD insert too, btw. :)