If you want a pocketable camera, the 100VI isn't it. The Ricoh GRIII is in a different category. It's like half the size and 1/3rd of the weight compared to the Fuji or Sony.
I've been pocketing my X100 (the original), during light jacket weather for 14 years.
RoamingScott wrote:
Convincing arguments all the way around from the esteemed brain trust
This camera has a unique way of getting the worst takes out of everyone. It's incredible to watch in real time.
Yeah, but no need to apologize for your behavior… ;-)
- - -
Back to the real world: The term “pocketable” has always fascinated me. I wonder how many people literally want to or will carry a camera in their “pocket” versus those who just want a really small camera that might get carried in some other manner. I often carry my “small camera” in a small over-the-shoulder bag that also carries my wallet, phone, and a few other small items.
And those of you who do literally carry the camera in your “pocket” — what kind of pocket are you talking about? Your pants pocket? A jacket pocket? Something else?
Not suggesting that one option is better than the other. Just curious.
Pocketable..... I guess for people who experience seasonal weather and wear a jacket, the X100vi is very pocketable, as are many cameras with the right lens combinations. In fact, I will hold my camera in hand and keep the lenses in my pockets, ready to swap at a moment's notice. And that's why I love having seasons.
There's no denying that there's nothing smaller (with lens included) and offer the same iQ and MP as the x100vi on the market now (I'm 90% sure), just as there is nothing smaller and offer the same 61 MP as the A7CR. Psychologically, there's something appealing about having power gadgets that are compact regardless of whether we actually need that level of compactness, and the x100vi fits that appeal and then some.
What's scary is seeing the influx of second-hand x100v cameras hitting the market lately. What's striking is that most sellers are only offering prices around 10-20% lower than the MSRP. On the other hand, when the A7RV was released, there wasn't nearly as many second-hand A7RIVs available, and they were going for a significant 30-40% less than the MSRP. While the abundance of 2nd-hand x100v could be due to greater perceived improvements between generations in x100vi over a7rv, I'm sure a substantial portion of the demand is driven by hype, not unlike the iPhone.
rattymouse wrote:
I've been pocketing my X100 (the original), during light jacket weather for 14 years.
You can also fit an A7C in a coat pocket. I even fit my Canon R6 with lens attached in my coat pocket. But I assumed we were talking about jeans pockets. Either way, the X100 isn't particularly more pocketable than the A7C, which was the comparison we were using.
macadphotos wrote:
Pocketable..... I guess for people who experience seasonal weather and wear a jacket, the X100vi is very pocketable, as are many cameras with the right lens combinations. In fact, I will hold my camera in hand and keep the lenses in my pockets, ready to swap at a moment's notice. And that's why I love having seasons.
There's no denying that there's nothing smaller (with lens included) and offer the same iQ and MP as the x100vi on the market now (I'm 90% sure), just as there is nothing smaller and offer the same 61 MP as the A7CR. Psychologically, there's something appealing about having power gadgets that are compact regardless of whether we actually need that level of compactness, and the x100vi fits that appeal and then some.
What's scary is seeing the influx of second-hand x100v cameras hitting the market lately. What's striking is that most sellers are only offering prices around 10-20% lower than the MSRP. On the other hand, when the A7RV was released, there wasn't nearly as many second-hand A7RIVs available, and they were going for a significant 30-40% less than the MSRP. While the abundance of 2nd-hand x100v could be due to greater perceived improvements between generations in x100vi over a7rv, I'm sure a substantial portion of the demand is driven by hype, not unlike the iPhone....Show more →
100V sellers may only be asking a 10-20% discount now, but we don't know that they will sell them at this price. The 100VI has also pushed the price up a bit, which supports the 100V price. Second hand A7Cs also face competition from other Sony cameras such as second hand A7IIIs, RIIIs and the like, whereas I think the 100V faces less in-house competition due to its unique features.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Yeah, but no need to apologize for your behavior… ;-)
- - -
Back to the real world: The term “pocketable” has always fascinated me. I wonder how many people literally want to or will carry a camera in their “pocket” versus those who just want a really small camera that might get carried in some other manner. I often carry my “small camera” in a small over-the-shoulder bag that also carries my wallet, phone, and a few other small items.
And those of you who do literally carry the camera in your “pocket” — what kind of pocket are you talking about? Your pants pocket? A jacket pocket? Something else?
Not suggesting that one option is better than the other. Just curious....Show more →
Ricoh GRIII is genuinely pocketable- will fit comfortably anywhere a wallet will fit.
I wouldn’t be surprised if V prices hold firm, IF we have a huge supply crunch for the VI.
Once the VI is available at retail, V prices will plummet.
Geoff D F wrote:
100V sellers may only be asking a 10-20% discount now, but we don't know that they will sell them at this price. The 100VI has also pushed the price up a bit, which supports the 100V price. Second hand A7Cs also face competition from other Sony cameras such as second hand A7IIIs, RIIIs and the like, whereas I think the 100V faces less in-house competition due to its unique features.
PhilthePhrame wrote:
Ricoh GRIII is genuinely pocketable- will fit comfortably anywhere a wallet will fit.
Indeed.
I’m not suggesting that there are not cameras that are literally pocketable. (Though with big enough “pockets,” I suppose that a view camera might be pocketable.)
It is just such a fuzzy concept.
In any case, there’s a zero sum relationship between camera capabilities, potential image quality, and camera size/weight. That’s not a bad thing. It is just something to think about carefully.
Some might read that to mean, “don’t sacrifice image quality for smaller camera size.” But I think that would be wrong. If one is making and selling wall size prints, there’s a good chance that he/she will have to endure carrying larger gear. But few are doing that. Most folks buying these cameras aren’t printing at all, and most never display anything larger than their laptop screen. In these cases, there’s really no added value in carrying a larger-than-necessary camera.
Given that you can make an excellent 20” x 30” print from Fujifilm APS-C files, few people will see any real world benefit form a larger camera or the potential image quality improvements from a full frame sensor… so when smaller size and weight are important to them, there’s little reason to give that up for supposed image quality improvements that the won’t see and which will weigh them down.
I do not have the Ricoh GRIII, though I hear a lot of praise for it. In fact, one of my sons uses a camera in that series as his “always with me” camera because it is literally pocketable. (He also uses some other stuff like a Canon DSLR and old Leicas he has fixed up.) And here, the same argument that suggests the Fujifilm APS-C cameras over full frame could recommend it over the Fujiflm options — it is very small, and it produced good image quality.
