Fuji { Fuji Is The New Leica } | Things.That.Make.You.Go.Hmmm.

"Fuji is the new Leica." // Zack Arias via: http://zackarias.com/editorial-photography/galatasaray-bests-schalke-fuji-x100s-bests-leica/

Hmmmmm.

Personally, I can't wait for his review. I met Zack a couple of years back here in San Francisco and felt that the guy was genuine and humble. And I still have an enormous respect for him for his no-nonsense straight from the heart assessment of things. He came to visit with his son. One thing was clear, he loves photography and has a passion for the industry. He had his beloved X100 slung across his body, and I opted for my Olympus EP-3 instead of my X100 (Fuji X-Pro1 wasn't out yet at the time), and another friend had his E-PM2. But we ended up street-shooting and "instagramming" (pre-Facebook acquisition days) around downtown San Francisco, capturing images mostly with our iPhones. B-)

What do you think of his assessment about Fuji? Is Fuji really the new Leica?
 
P

pniev

Guest
I understand why people want to compare. But I'd like to assess Fuji for what it is. As a camera, as a company, as a brand. A brand is more than a camera, pixels, design, etc. It's also emotional. Leica has been able to create a unique brand with it's own group of aficionados. It took them years to achieve that. And it should remain unique.

Frankly, I do not care if Fuji is the new whatever. I like the company (listening to customers, innovative, the guts to do something different), the camera (great retro design and build), lenses (well, they've made lenses for Hasselblad), and price. And most importantly..I can shoot photos I like and it appeals to my brand preference neurons. To me this makes Fuji unique in its own right.

Above all, I do realize that Zack might be much better equiped to make a statement like this than I am. I am glad he is very happy with his Fujis. i am too.

Just my two cents.

Peter
 

Phoenix

All-Pro
Dec 28, 2011
124
Melbourne, Australia
Phoenix Gonzales
I've seen Zack work and he truly is passionate with photography as well as being down to earth and humble, he seems like a bloke I'd happily sit and share a beer with.

I think I have mentioned this somewhere before but as for question is Fuji the new Leica? I have to look at the comparison in a factual manner. First off they're different cameras, they do have some aesthetic similarities but it's pretty much apples and oranges, one isn't necessarily better than the other it's just different. I've come across various forums calling the Fuji X as a 'Poor man's Leica', if this is the case can we then call a Leica a 'Rich man's Fuji X'?

It's a bit aimless (imho) comparing 2 different cameras with the intent of stating that one is better than the other even if they do have aesthetic similarities e.g. they both look like DSLRs, they're both black, one has 27 megapixels and the other has 25, so is Nikon the new Canon?

I am truly happy with my XP-1 and plan to use it for years to come, however I am also saving up for my first Leica not because I want to shoot with a better camera, but because I also want to shoot with a different camera.
 

Lightmancer

Super Moderator
Aug 13, 2011
164
Sunny Frimley
Bill Palmer
I think both are belittled by drawing the parallel. I use both for a reason - a different experience and a different purpose in each case. One does not in any way replace the other.

Sent from another Galaxy
 

Biro

Super Moderator
Aug 7, 2011
124
Jersey Shore
Steve
I agree completely with thise who say parallels between Leica and Fuji aren't really apppropriate beyond an initial traditional camera style.

Leica - and I don't mean to put them down in any way - really had no choice but to become what it now is. With the commoditization of photography in the last half of the 20th century (a trend accelerated by the digitial era) and growing competition from Asia, there was a strong likelihood that Leica would have ended up like so many other storied camera brands that exist only on paper or are gone completely. Leica could have moved production to Asia or sold the brand to private equity. In that case, me might see "Leicas" the way one can still see "Rolleis" in Europe.

Instead, Leica - which was never a cheap brand - went the full-tilt retro-luxury route (not unlike Harley-Davidson). In this way, Leica could preserve and enhance the brand's cachet, thrive as a company, and no longer have to compete head-on with the unrelenting technical progress out of Asia.

Fuji, while sharing some traditional sensibilities with Leica, is meant to be an affordable brand - affordable as in roughly the same price as mainstream prosumer cameras and lenses. And, if one thinks about it, perhaps Fuji had no choice either. Before the appearance of the X line, Fuji seemed well on its way to becoming a foonote in the still camera industry.
 

Lawrence A.

Hall of Famer
Nov 8, 2012
124
New Mexico
Larry
I thought Leitz Solms was the new Leica (Leitz Wetzlar).

Kidding. I have an X100, but I'd still love to get me hands on an X1 or X2. It may not make any practical difference, but in lens tests the Leica f2.8 Elmarit is sharper, though this might not be the forum to bring it up. Mind you, I'm very happy with the lens in the X100, but I'm seeing more and more x1's for under $1000, so when I can I might well give one a try.

Then I'll have first hand knowledge of whether the Fuji X is the new Leica. Until then, I'm thinking they both have their place, with Fuji getting the nod for functionality (and affordability) and Leica for optical performance, though Fuji's optics are so good one could well forego any advantage Leica might offer there without any regrets. I'm so in love with the hybrid viewfinder in my X100 that Leica's X's are going to have really to perform to win me over.
 

flysurfer

Hall of Famer
Aug 31, 2011
123
I really hope that Fuji is the new Fuji and nothing else. They hopefully won't run out of ideas and won't feel the need to copy cameras and concepts from Leica, Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Sony, Pentax, Panasonic, Samsung, Hasselblad etc.

I hope they keep coming up with unique ideas, features and designs that "inspire" other camera makers to pick up the concept.
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 3, 2010
124
I get the comparison, and for sure he meant it in a good way, but in reality Fuji isn't the new anything. Fuji is nearly 80 years old, and their history is filled with greatness.
 

serhan

All-Pro
May 7, 2011
124
NYC
I don't know the Leica comparison, but finally X100s af speed is competitive with the other mirrorless cameras, which should help on sales.

Here is low light af comparison of RX1 and X100s (around 3:25 if you don't watch the whole video):
[video=youtube;bkSxex2D43o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkSxex2D43o&feature=player_embedded[/video]
 

Lawrence A.

Hall of Famer
Nov 8, 2012
124
New Mexico
Larry
Fuji being the new Fuji is perfectly OK with me. As Amin noted, they have a long history of accomplishing great things. Their fixed lens medium format G series film rangefinders are especially nice, and followed the beat of a different drummer at the time. And they've made some very nice glass over the years, even if, in large format, I always preferred Scheider lenses for what I felt was more attractive contrast. But if we are talking about Leica and Schneider in the same time as Fuji, it obviously has its own honored place in the photo lineup.

I really hope that Fuji is the new Fuji and nothing else. They hopefully won't run out of ideas and won't feel the need to copy cameras and concepts from Leica, Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Sony, Pentax, Panasonic, Samsung, Hasselblad etc.

I hope they keep coming up with unique ideas, features and designs that "inspire" other camera makers to pick up the concept.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
123
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
Whether there is any truth or, more to the point, relevance to the statement or not, having someone say to an audience that "Fuji is the new Leica" is surely a good way to grab attention. Advertising dollars well spent, I'd say. The key point seems to be that the X100S looks like being a great camera without the need for hyperbole. I actually don't see what makes the X100S more "Leica-like" than the X100 :confused:
 

Joey Wilson

Regular
Mar 19, 2012
28
I'm guessing that ZA meant Fujifilm (in his case, the x100s) was the 'new Leica' as it's like the 'old Leica': The best all-around instrument for candid photography, of course with the caveat that Leica in those days was affordable to a larger group of guys than the Black American Express card crowd it now caters to.

That's not an altogether bad comparison. But Fuji has always marched to its own drummer: The 'Texas Rangefinders', the GX680's, etc. As we speak, you can still buy the GF670, a brand-new 120/220 folding camera (I WANT one!). Marketing retro products is not exactly a new concept, but they have REALLY struck a nerve with these metal-bodied cameras and wonderful lenses. Amazing that Nikon, who instantly sold every SP and S3 re-issue they built (and still build the fabulous F6) didn't read the tea leaves and reach a similar answer.

I agree with Biro with Leica's current strategy, probably the only rational one they had before them. But of course, Fujifilm almost was the new Leica: When they were in money trouble several years back, one of the prospective buyers? Fujifilm.
 
I like the company (listening to customers, innovative, the guts to do something different), the camera (great retro design and build), lenses (well, they've made lenses for Hasselblad), and price. And most importantly..I can shoot photos I like and it appeals to my brand preference neurons. To me this makes Fuji unique in its own right.
Peter - I couldn't have said it better. Your two cents is worth a lot more than you think. Thank you for stopping by and leaving your thoughts. B-)
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom