Fujifilm X10 'Orbs' Investigated. Does the Firmware Fix Work?

Studio Scene: EXR 'DR' Mode

Something that we have noticed after extended use of the X10 is that the appearance of the white discs/orbs differs depending on the 'DR' dynamic range setting. In full-resolution 12MP mode the reason for this is obvious if you know how the camera works - increasing the DR setting from 100% to 200% and up to 400% increases the base ISO sensitivity from 100 to 200, to 400, and as we've already seen, increasing ISO sensitivity reduces the intensity of the white discs effect.

But what about EXR mode? In 'DR' EXR mode the X10's 'DR' dynamic range setting can be extended up to 1600% using a combination of exposure and tone curve adjustment, and EXR technology. These images were shot in identical conditions to the samples on the previous page, but ISO was set to automatic (400) and because exposure cannot be manually adjusted, exposure compensation was used to match the brightness. 

EXR 'DR' mode, DR 100%, ISO 400 (FW 1.02) EXR 'DR' mode, DR 100% ISO 400 (FW 1.03)
EXR 'DR' mode, DR 200% ISO 400 (FW 1.02) EXR 'DR' mode, DR 200% ISO 400 (FW 1.03) 
EXR 'DR' mode, DR 400% ISO 400 (FW 1.02) EXR 'DR' mode, DR 400% ISO 400 (FW 1.03)
EXR 'DR' mode, DR 800% ISO 200 (FW 1.02) EXR 'DR' mode, DR 800% ISO 200 (FW 1.03) 
EXR 'DR' mode, DR 1600% ISO 400 (FW 1.02) EXR 'DR' mode, DR 1600% ISO 400 (FW 1.03)

As you can see, the white discs decrease in size as you go up the DR scale, but they retain their artificial-looking, hard-edged appearance. Again though, there is no noticeable improvement between firmware versions 1.02 and 1.03. We also tried shooting side-by-side comparisons in EXR 'SN' mode, which is designed to deliver lower noise at 6MP, but with identical results - no improvement with firmware 1.03.

Sample Variation

One curious thing that we've noticed while working through this issue is that not all X10's display the dreaded 'white orbs' to the same extent. We've used two cameras from different production runs, and while both produce images that show the effect, one displays more severe 'orbing' than the other. We've used images from the better of the two cameras in the rest of this article, so you can judge for yourself the severity of the issue, but for the sake of completeness here's an example of the difference between the two models that we've used, at base ISO and full-resolution (12MP). 

Camera A  Camera B
Camera A Camera B

We would hope that Camera B, in the table above, (from an earlier production run) is the exception, and that more of the X10s on the market behave like Camera A in our example. Even if this is true though, the key point is that the 'white discs' effect is visible in images from both cameras that we have used, and in neither case does updating to firmware 1.03 make a difference. We have asked Fujifilm whether or not changes have been made to the X10's manufacture since production began and we will update this article with a response as soon as possible. 

Summary

We're still working through our testing, but for now it seems clear that firmware version 1.03 does not appear to have a significant impact on the appearance of 'orbs' and certainly isn't the silver-bullet solution that a lot of users had hoped for.

We have been unable to observe a meaningful improvement in either studio or real world testing which strongly reinforces our suspicion that the problem is hardware-related, and cannot be solved by an adjustment to the camera's firmware. The issue is caused by uncontrolled sensor blooming, where signal spills out from photodiodes radially, onto their neighbors, which creates an artificial-looking white disc around blown-out point highlights. Blooming isn't unique to the X10, but this effect - the distinctive 'orbs' - is unlike anything we've seen before from a modern camera.

After drawing a blank in all of our image quality testing we had thought that perhaps the new firmware adjusted the camera's program line in Automatic ISO mode. As we've seen, the appearance of the white discs is less severe at higher ISO sensitivity settings, so perhaps the new firmware biases automatic ISO to use these high settings more frequently? We have seen reports that this is the case in EXR Auto mode and we will continue to work through the issue, but so far we have not been able to consistently demonstrate any clear bias towards higher ISOs with the new firmware. 

So after all this, what have we learned? Here are our findings, summarized.

  • 'Orbs' are real, but some cameras may be more prone than others due (presumably) to hardware variation.
  • The appearance of the orbs changes as you increase ISO sensitivity, and they become softer.
  • By increasing the DR '%' settings you can reduce the size of the orbs, but they remain unattractive unless you increase ISO sensitivity.  
  • In itself, firmware version 1.03 appears to have no noticeable intrinsic effect on the appearance or intensity of the orbs.
  • However, some reports suggest that auto ISO performance in EXR Auto mode is tweaked in FW 1.03 to select higher ISO settings (where orbing is less noticeable). We cannot consistently demonstrate any high ISO bias in FW 1.03 compared to 1.02 (but we'll keep on looking). 
Needless to say, we're still working through this issue. There is more to do, and we will incorporate our full findings into an in-depth review of the X10 as soon as possible.

UPDATE March 5th 2012: Following the publication of this article Fujifilm has promised us a 'definitive solution' to the so-called 'white orbs' problem, which will be announced on the 12th March. We will report full details when we have them. 


We would like to thank Glazers Camera of Seattle for the loan of equipment used in this article.

Comments

Total comments: 572
1234
Esa Tuunanen
By Esa Tuunanen (Feb 26, 2012)

Darn what what a crazy feature...
Without better knowledge of its cause it looks almost like if there's some defect in sensor (design, manufacturing or maybe combination because of sample variation) which allows saturated pixels to spill over and start flooding surrounding pixels.

At least that would fit to problem decreasing at higher ISOs because basically those decrease amount of light received by pixels and hence "amount of pixel's oversaturation."

Might not show in every shot but definitely "car engine goes out if let go to run at certain RPM" level problem.
Basing to number of people downplaying this problem as minor scratch in the paint job looks like retro style Fuji is on its way to gathering religious status.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Jostian
By Jostian (Feb 26, 2012)

Fujifilm's silence is deafening... if only they knew the damage this is doing to their image (besides the orbs), with 5 review sites now getting orbs let's see Fuji laugh the issue off as they tried to do when X10 owners started raising the issue a few months ago!... unethical and dishonest!

7 upvotes
Marek07
By Marek07 (Feb 26, 2012)

How can a company like Fujifilm get it so right, yet so wrong!!??

2 upvotes
Red Bicycle
By Red Bicycle (Feb 26, 2012)

So right yet so wrong - so true.

1 upvote
Franka T.L.
By Franka T.L. (Feb 26, 2012)

doesn't really matter how and why , right , cause the real deal is that it simply do not work .. plain and simple

1 upvote
Joe11
By Joe11 (Feb 26, 2012)

I do not want just a orbs comparison, but a complete picture quality comparison, in terms of details, sharpness, dynamic range and noise.

Currently, the people, that don't care much about orbs, will look on other aspects.

So is the Fujifilm X10 better in terms of overall picture quality ?
If yes, I would buy Fuji X10, although there might be orbs in very few pictures.
If no, I would buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 of course.

I don't like just simply orbs discussion.
I would like the reasons behind and there is too less discussion about this unfortunately. Where are the specialists that know the reasons and can tell other advantages and disadvantages of this new sensor / orbs ? If these orbs are a compromise for having better picture qualities in other conditions and it is not possible to improve both the same way, than I will be happy when these orbs will not be removed !

2 upvotes
jorepuusa
By jorepuusa (Feb 26, 2012)

HunterSThompson, some people in USA have checked Your background, You do not have a Fuji X10 and You have never even held one. To our knowledge You are even not a photographer at all but a troll who writes at many forums with different nicknames and always the same kind of hate messages as here.

2 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

from what i've read of many professionals' opinions across the web and forums:

- if you shoot RAW, the IQ is not necessarily any better than lx5, g12, xz-1 (similar size sensor) cameras.
- if you shoot JPEG, IQ of x10 will generally exceed other similar size sensor cameras, in terms of noise, colors, details
- richness of colors on JPEG image can be difficult to duplicate with RAW processing (seems the camera does something with colors not found in typical RAW processors)
- dynamic range when shooting L (full 12MP) is not better than for example canon s100, but pretty good overall
- dynamic range when shooting M size with EXR exposure tricks is definitely better than all point and shoot, (though in my opinion it takes some post process to get the image looking as natural as a normal non-EXR image)
- no-one really knows the exact reasons behind the orbs, could be conspiracy, bad quality control, cost-saving measure, customer-butthole-reaming manuevre, take your pick

1 upvote
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

some other points regarding x10 vs other cameras:

- sharpness of x10 lens not as good as say oly xz-1
- sharpness of x10 images also suffer from processing EXR pattern (you won't get as much detail from 12MP EXR RAW file as you would from 12MP bayer)
- noise on x10 has a more 'organic' 'film-like' appearance than other cameras, especially when comparing JPEG. Again if you process RAW this advantage is largely negated (nothing that a PC can't do with 1000x more power consumption and probably 100x more time than the dinky camera processor)

this last point seems particularly impressive to me, most people don't think much of it, but I believe it really is something to achieve the quality of JPEG that the x10 does, without resorting to post process on RAW

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Jore, why is it your only defense of his CAMERA is always to attack a PERSON?The police have seized 400 marijuana plants that were grown in a Kowloon City flat. No arrests have been made. Officers said the indoor farm was very well-equipped, and most of the plants were ready for harvesting. The drugs are believed to have been intended for the local market.

1 upvote
Joe11
By Joe11 (Feb 26, 2012)

In my opinion, the reason can be contaminated material or a compromise. We don't know yet.
But thank you for your opinions, also in terms of overall picture quality.
I just can compare to the past and pictures of older FujiFilm cameras were always more pleasant to me than from other brands (my first one was a Fuji Finepix 2600 Zoom).
For me, JPEGs are much more important.
I don't want to do any post-processing.
For post-processing reasons, a small DSLR like the Nikon D40 can be used as well.
The X10 should be the better compact with similar DSLR characteristics, but without need of any post processing. This is also how it is advertized. All other buy the X100.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

Joe11, that is really bizarre reasoning. If you have these ugly, distracting, bright white orbs all over your image, or *anywhere* in your image, where they should not be, it *doesn't matter* if the rest of the image quality is great. It's like making a beautiful print of a beautiful photo, then having someone drizzle white drops of paint onto the print. That may be an acceptable "compromise" to you, but it certainly isn't to many others. And BTW, no other camera imposes this same "compromise" on its users.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

@GaryJP I think its perfectly reasonable to attack a PERSON if they are behaving like a c@ck. I am sorry about your drugs, that sounds like a bummer...

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 27, 2012)

Yes. Well spotted sir.

It's a non sequitur.

Like attacking someone's personality to defend a shoddy camera or a shoddy camera manufacturer.

1 upvote
washyshots
By washyshots (Feb 27, 2012)

I have the camera and purchased it on the day it was released in the UK, and have not, as yet, shot any images in the kind of light that will reveal the 'orbs'.

That said, I would find the 'white orbs' to be very off-putting and it would certainly spoil my enjoyment if I was shooting low light images of the kind alluded to here.

I have thought about what this means for me and I have concluded that had I known about the white orbs beforehand there is no way I would have made the purchase.

Maybe Fuji are mulling this issue over as we speak? — I find it hard to believe they won't be in light of the bad press. Maybe they will make an announcement after careful consideration of the options. Maybe, as some have suggested — they don't care!

I hope they do something though — it would put them back in some kind of 'good light' :-)

By the way - Jessops UK will not take the camera back because it is outside their thirty day return policy.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

i don't often put form before functionality, but sometimes something looks and feels to darn good to put up with waiting for the next greatest thing or compromising with the existing choices. honestly we could be waiting for forever before another camera comes out with:

- manual zoom
- decent ovf
- lots of manual controls
- light and pocketable in a pinch (not comfortable but at least you can stash it in a pocket if needed)
- 1cm macro
- great JPEG results in terms of color, detail, noise
- fast performance from shot to shot (at least in JPEG)

so, call me a wasteful money-burning fujifilm shill, but i've been having a great time with this camera. probably helps i don't shoot much at night or into speculars, and don't have demanding standards of image quality (some people may be annoyed by blooming which i wouldn't notice or care about)

and, to a small degree, i feel it is worthwhile to support fujifilm for having the guts to attempt making a camera like this, as flawed as it is

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

> a thinking person should be more than ashamed to admit that

if nobody bought this camera there would never be another one like it, and i'd be screwing myself over because this is pretty much everything i'd ever wanted, minus the orbs.

so if it is at least somewhat popular there might be another attempt to release another like it, by fujifilm or another company, and at long last i'll have the compact camera i've always wanted. i don't see it happening any other way, sure as hell won't happen if we punish FF by not buying their flawed product.

and really, to criticize FF for 'screwing over their customers' is kinda hypocritical, do you think canon/nikon/panasonic aren't trying to rip off their customers by releasing the same darn point and shoot year after year? at least FF has made some attempt, and the camera works really well for my uses (obviously not up to your standards)

1 upvote
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

i'm aware there will be better cameras, but they'll look exactly like the g12, lx-5, xz-1, g1x, etc. zoom by wire, mini-ovf, go f-yourself if you want otherwise. believe me, canon/nikon/panasonic doesn't care about you or image quality any more than fujifilm, they just can't risk making flawed products like the x10

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

yea, sure fujifilm insult the customers directly to their face, but canon and nikon do it backhandedly by releasing the same old dependable but non-innovative camera year after year, and charging for it as though it's real innovation. the g12 was $560 when it came out, and it had the exact same feature set as g11 + a couple tweaks. lol

so, your faith in the honor of companies like canon and nikon is a bit laughable when they sit on their asses and force feed u the same garbage they've been doing for the past 10 years because they make the majority of their money through SLR lens sales. they don't even bother to address our concerns, they just shove it up our hoo haws and laugh because we lap it up like dogs

0 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

it is all about 'competence'' and 'honor' of canon that they no longer release g series camera with f2.0-3.0 lens, instead they equip 2.8-4.5 lens because they love you and your mother with their utmost heart of hearts

0 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

to nikon's credit, they did come out with the v1/j1 which is evidently a very high quality system overall, though targeted to the less-buttons-is-better crowd

0 upvotes
locke_fc
By locke_fc (Feb 26, 2012)

Hunter, I can understand that you are upset having bought the X10 (which I'm assuming you have), but your attitude is highly suspicious and is not helping your case. You seem to be on duty to reply and attack every single positive comment about the X10 posted here.
Looks weird. Maybe you should come to terms with the fact that SOME people can find acceptable things that you don't. That's just life.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

When I look at a photograph I can never tell how cute the camera was that shot it.

Maybe that's just me.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

xeriwthe, your argument as shown on this page seems to be: "I should get other suckers to buy it, so Fuji makes enough money from it, so I have a second iteration."

Have you considered working for Fuji? Their morality seems remarkably similar.

0 upvotes
xeriwthe
By xeriwthe (Feb 26, 2012)

Hi GaryJP,

I don't see that I am trying to get other suckers to buy, I've never denied orbs, nor downplayed them, I don't see how my posts can be construed as such.

I say that I like the camera, appreciate its innovative-ness, but ultimately warn people about its massive flaw. if they have similar frame of mind to me, then i wouldn't think twice about recommending, testing it for themselves, figuring out whether the camera is OK for their purposes.

the morality of other camera companies seems just as questionable. releasing the same model with extremely small tweaks year after year and charging an arm and a leg for it? funny

in summary, f*** fujifilm for shoving this out the door, but f*** canon and nikon for doing something even lazier and in my opinion less defensible

0 upvotes
binauralbeats
By binauralbeats (Feb 26, 2012)

You guys that don't care about the orbs issue must have money to burn. Personally, I can't afford a working camera plus a $600 "fun" camera.

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

Buy a working camera then. DSLRs are the fastest, most versitile, and most intuitive cameras, which is why the are the standard for most high paced photography and learning.

The x10 is for knowledgeable photographers that want a light travel camera that has masp control, manual focusing, decent IQ, and minimalistic features of an advance camera...or, someone with a lot of money that plans on shooting it fully automated in auto EXR mode.

Either way an entry level DSLR will still blow the x10 out of the water in terms of performance and versatility.

I don't know why an photographer would buy this as their exclusive camera. It's a point-n-shoot, and damn good point-n-shoot with innovative sensor technology and phenomenal tones and color, but bottom-line, it's a point-n-shoot.

Most pros are picking this up as a third body. Mainly for personal fun projects, everyday use, and going out with friend type shooting.

Skip the x10, you obviously don't understand it strengths.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

@nakeddork-- I think a more realistic and more accurate statement would be that "most pros were *originally* thinking of picking up this body, but now have serious reservations."

Any person with any decent standards of image performance and any experience with photography will be doing a bit of research, evaluating test images, and eventually they'll discover this white orb issue that is increasingly becoming well documented. And at that point, I doubt many potential buyers are going to just sweep this issue under the rug. On the contrary, I think most are going to find it as serious an issue as DPreview is.

Keep in mind that no one is saying that the camera's other merits aren't great. But at the end of the day, it's really about the images that a camera can produce. And a camera shouldn't be introducing large, bright, eye-grabbing round artifacts that other cameras aren't introducing.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

I know a good amount of pro shooters and long time that own this camera and love it. A lot of them shot film leicas and like the x10 more.

The vast majority of people that own this camera like it. The orbs...which has never been a problem for me...is a tiny trivial thing. compared to make great things the x10 does have.

I own this camera and i certainly recommend as an enthusiast camera. Hell, I'm gonna play around with it on my shoot tomorrow when i testing the metering the lights for my hasselblad. It certainly is a fun camera.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Yeah right. Talk to the shooters in the FCC in HK and they'll laugh you out of the building.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Or possibly it isn't so bad for some examples of this camera? I have to aim directly at a 50w equivalent halogen bulb from 1m away to achieve this effect. How would that impede any real world use of the camera?

0 upvotes
ksievers
By ksievers (Feb 26, 2012)

See, it only took eleven minutes. One of them even tossed in a grammar critique. Amazing...no wait...sad.

5 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Sad is when a company defecates on users and some of them say: "Great, and may I have some more please?"

5 upvotes
ksievers
By ksievers (Feb 26, 2012)

Nope. Just Kent Sievers, working photojournalist for well over thirty years, published locally nationally and internationally. Shot a lot of fuji film back in the day. Still have a fuji hat somewhere in the basement but that's my only connection to fuji. http://www.kentsievers.com Please Hunter, share your real name and credentials with the group.

3 upvotes
ksievers
By ksievers (Feb 26, 2012)

Your lack of class is showing but the pictures to back up your mouth are not. Bu bye. Too many trolls around here these days.

5 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

Regardless of whether you like Fuji or not, or liked their film or not, I can't see how anyone in their right mind, with reasonable standards of image quality, can look at the two test shots and say, with a straight face and without knowing which cameras were being tested: "Yeah, I'll take the one with the bright white orbs where the specular highlights should be. Yeah, I like how the camera turned those specular highlights into bright orbs that look like someone installed white LED lights in those chrome balls!"

Some image from the X10 look like someone installed LED lights everywhere. Other images look like someone took a holepuncher to a printed photo. Other images look like someone cloned lit lightbulbs into locations where no lit lightbulbs existed (just specular reflections). Other images transform oval streetlamps into perfectly round globes. I guess that tells us about your standards of image quality and truth in photos.

1 upvote
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

@T3 I think it turns on whether in use, you experience any of the effects you describe. I'm assuming here that neither Kent nor I experience the things you describe or that it hasn't impeded our enjoyment of the camera in anyway

2 upvotes
ksievers
By ksievers (Feb 27, 2012)

For the sake of clarity, it should be noted that several of Hunter SThompson's posts were so outrageous, they were removed from the string.

1 upvote
ksievers
By ksievers (Feb 26, 2012)

Graynoise, I vote C, minor annoyance. I was planning on buying one, but am waiting to see if there is a recall. Either way, I still will. If this were to be my only camera, I might think twice, but for me it will be a sweet little unobtrusive low light tool. Now, all you snarky little haters have at me. You all add so much to the value of these forums.

6 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

Everyone is free to make their own choices. But the point of what DPreview is doing is to allow people to make an educated decision. It allows people to have an idea of what they're getting into. It allows others to decide if this issue is acceptable or unacceptable. Unfortunately, many people made their purchase decisions *before* this "feature" came to light (no pun intended), so they weren't afforded the same information that you have now. $600 isn't chump change for most people.

6 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

ksievers, you should THANK those "snarky haters" (never mind that "haters" is unforgivably juvenile ad hom-ism.

Thanks to them you can get the camera at least 25% cheaper, and maybe even half price.

If you are willing to put up with this:

http://g1.img-dpreview.com/1895F7D93ACD4559BF8159D9D6340111.jpg

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

@GaryJP -- Didn't you get the memo? Motorcycles with shiny chrome are not on Fuji's approved shooting list for the X10. So clearly, you only have yourself to blame for the appearance of white orbs in your photo.

2 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

It's fine, I'm noticing that the only people that are having issues, don't really understand the fundamentals of photography.

I know a fair amount of pros and experienced photographers that love the x10 as their fun body.

I quite enjoy it, and I shoot on a wide range of cameras of different formats.

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

@nakeddork , I shoot weddings and events. I don't think I know *any* wedding or event photographers who would want these white orbs in *any* of there cameras, whether they be their FF DSLRs or their compact pocket cameras. If I take a picture of candles or a shiny silver cake knife, I don't want these hard-edged orbs showing up in my photos like ugly bright pock marks.

And the appearance of these orbs does not discriminate between an experienced photographer and a beginner photographer; it's an equal opportunity offender. So let's stop with this non-sense that "the only people that are having issues, don't really understand the fundamentals of photography." Besides, anyone with or without a fundamental understanding of photography should know that specular highlights and reflections shouldn't all look like glaring, round, hard-edged, white radioactive ping-pong balls.

2 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

I said using it as a fun body. I don't know anyone that would use the x10 for dedicated pro work.

The x10 is a high end hybrid point-n-shoot. It's not a Leica with the performance of the d3s and the iq of a hasselblad.

The x10 is the pns for the experienced photographer, and it's great. I certainly would not recomend it for work...it shoots too slow and the battery won't hack it.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

@nakeddork - You don't get it. It doesn't matter if it's not being used for "dedicated pro work." The point is that no camera should be doing this, not even a lower-cost "fun" digicam. Do you see the Panasonic LX5, the other camera used in the DPreview test, producing these glaring white orbs? And isn't the Panasonic LX5 a high end point-n-shoot? Heck, even an inexpensive Canon Powershot digicam isn't making these orbs. So your excuse that "It's not a Leica or a D3S or a Hasselblad" isn't going to cut it.

BTW, I'd love to hear Fuji making that excuse.

Fuji: "Hey, what do you expect? This ain't no Leica S2 or Nikon D3S or Hasselblad H3D! So fugetaboutit! Capish?"

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Ignore naked dork. He tries too hard to start flame wars, and it's embarrassingly obvious. Anyone who can neither see orbs, or excuses them, has proved his own challenges with regard to assessing imagery.

It isn't easy to get banned from some groups on Flickr, but he is rather good at it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

The orbs aren't a problem, it's such a rare occurance. You guys are making moutain out of a mole hill. The fact of the matter is you guys just suck a photography.

2 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Not being funny here, but @GaryJP and @Hunter SThompson (a more apt username would be hard to achieve here) are posting links to the same "orb" photos at different web addresses. Depending on which one is posting its from the X10 or the XS1. Could it be they are both part of the same organised hate campaign?

2 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 26, 2012)

The Orbs Of Nonsense

Hello darkness, my old friend
The orbs are showing up again
Because a highlight softly creeping
Left its burnout while I was shooting
And the white discs that was planted in my frame
Still remains
Within the orbs of nonsense

In restless dreams I count the cost
Of having bought a sheer lemon
'Neath the halo of a street lamp
My pictures turned into instant crap
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of an orb highlight
That split the night
And touched the orbs of nonsense

.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
15 upvotes
shutterbobby
By shutterbobby (Feb 26, 2012)

Good one!!!

0 upvotes
solsang
By solsang (Feb 26, 2012)

Rhyming Orbs Of Nonsense

Hello darkness, my old friend
The orbs are showing up again
Because a highlight softly e-creeping
Left its burnout while I was shooting
And the white discs that was planted in my frame
Still remains
Within the orbs of nonsense

In restless dreams I count the cost
Of having half my pictures lost
'Neath the halo of a street lamp
My camera turns into a giant amp
When my eyes are stabbed by the flash of an orb highlight
That ruins the night
Creating orbs of nonsense

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Feb 26, 2012)

Thing is it shouldn't be DPR looking into this, it should be Fuji!

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 26, 2012)

We're in touch with Fujifilm and they are taking it seriously.

7 upvotes
Ol Iver S
By Ol Iver S (Feb 26, 2012)

glad to hear that barney, thanks a lot for dpreviews´ and your efforts in this matter so far. this whole affair shouldn´t be about bashing the x10, but to "help" fujifilm realizing and working on its shortcomings ;)

0 upvotes
graynoise
By graynoise (Feb 26, 2012)

As a very satisfied owner of the X10, I'm surprised by the attention and anger the orb issue has generated. Perhaps I'm too cynical, but it feels like a bit of a beat-up. On one level I appreciate the attention to detail of the DPR test, but on the other hand I think it takes away from so many great things about this camera.

It would be interesting to see a show of hands from owners of the camera.

Pop Quiz, Fuji X10 orbs:

a) Major issue. I want my money back!
b) Disappointing, but not a deal breaker
c) Minor annoyance
d) What's this about orbs?

Disclaimer: I don't shoot a lot of metallic balls with my X10, or sunsets over water, and before reading this test was unaware of the orb issue.

5 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

For my shooting, it's a deal breaker.

Don't try shooting Paris at night with it. Or even your holiday pics on the beach. Unless it's cloudy.

6 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

@Graynoise I think your comment is perfectly reasonable and as an X10 owner I agree with you. However, here on DPreview I think your comment is misguided. All you will trigger is about 25 mentalists replying who will insist you are a "shill" working for Fuji.

4 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Just for the sake of irony I think I will start "liking" hunter's posts. They are so mental that I am imagining him sat in his basement with a hat made of tin foil on his head.

3 upvotes
graynoise
By graynoise (Feb 26, 2012)

@sgoldswo I see this now. Probably the reason that this was my first post despite being a member since 2007.

2 upvotes
aeneon
By aeneon (Feb 26, 2012)

a ) and GOT my money back.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

"Just for the sake of irony I think I will start "liking" hunter's posts. They are so mental that I am imagining him sat in his basement with a hat made of tin foil on his head."

HOW many years in Cambridge?

"Mentalist"?

2 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 26, 2012)

The orbs can at any time photographed / produces become: all reflections are dangerous: see you here:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/648896439/photos/1768685/shokl

2 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Gary, I spent 3 happy years in Churchill College Cambridge.

Get a sense of humour.

I think "mentalist" is a fair description. How else do you describe someone who's only response to someone who likes a camera is to attack them and claim they work for the maker of that Camera? Why precisely should I hold back?

I sympathise for you if you genuinely bought the camera and had a problem, but the remedy for that problem is to return it.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

It's not a remedy in the part of the world I am in. This is a big world.

I agree about personal attacks, but I have seen rather too many based on the fact that people don't like their "precious" criticised. And been the subject of them.

A camera is a tool. Unfortunately so are SOME of those who own it.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Gary, if you genuinely think the camera is defective in the manner you describe, it isn't fit for purpose. Last time I checked the law in Hong Kong around that was pretty much identical to the UK.

I couldn't agree with you more on your final comment. I hope you have more luck with your new G1X.

0 upvotes
Rudovous
By Rudovous (Feb 26, 2012)

c/d. Absolutely righ! I would have the other small issues on the list...maybe. But for sure not the minor problem like this one.

0 upvotes
Danielepaolo
By Danielepaolo (Feb 26, 2012)

a) Major Issue.

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

C

0 upvotes
deeohuu
By deeohuu (Feb 26, 2012)

e) Major issue. I returned it before my grace period expired after I saw Fuji's condescending response.

0 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Feb 26, 2012)

"b) Disappointing, but not a deal breaker".

As quite a few others, I bought the camera while knowing about the orbs, but also (naively awaiting firmware 1.03). Still a great camera, but seeing no solution on the orb matter, I certainly expect some action from Fujifilms side e.g. compensation, upgrade or recall - if not, this becomes "a) Major issue. I want my money back!"

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 26, 2012)

@sgoldswo: no, no - there is already an issue in the real world:
see my photo of this afternoon while shopping
(left on the stool)

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/648896439/photos/1768685/sho_kl

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

irony

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 26, 2012)

no, no irony - look at the photo on the left side

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

Clearly, these orbs can pop up at any time. I can see why people wouldn't want a camera that can deliver these unexpected "surprises"! And it's nearly impossible to be constantly vigilant for things in a scene that might cause these orbs. What a pain in the butt! Even worse is that these orbs are the bright spots in an image, which draw your eye to them, since the human eye is naturally drawn to the brightest areas of an image. Your image looks like someone attached a lightbulb to that bench on the left.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

@rusticus, it did actually take me time to spot this "orb". Perhaps they are all over my photos and I haven't noticed...

All I can say is that I've never had that effect occur unless I am pointing directly at a bright light from not very far away.

0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Feb 26, 2012)

Looks like the X10 is over-exposed here. Cut down the shutter-speed and aperture more. Notable thing here is X10 is at least 1 stop better than LX5.

1 upvote
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 26, 2012)

What on earth is a shill?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

shill/SHil/
Noun:
An accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.

3 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 26, 2012)

Thanks. What is the word for someone who discourages others?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Probably related to the word for people who are easily discouraged.

In this case it seems to be "DPReview".

In Fuji's case, if they put the fair warning on their box, it would be "honest".

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 25, 2012)

I own the X10 amongst a host of other cameras (A900, NEX 7, X100). This obsession with X10 "orbs" doesn't do credit to DPR. It's very embarrasing to read this tosh continually. This is a non-issue in real world use. My X10 is a great little camera and I've seen the orbs maybe 3 times in the time I've owned the camera.

You do end up wondering if some of the people on this forum have been paid by other camera companies to make a fuss about nothing. It was the same with the video clicking on the NEX 5N - a complete molehill turned into a mountain by a few reviewers/posters.

If people have this much of a problem they really need to get a life...

8 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes, old son, I work for Fujifilm. That's right. I go there to work everyday....

Oh no hang on, I'm a UK qualified solicitor who takes photos in his spare time and has nothing to do with Fujifilm. Would you like my SRA number so you can check? Loser. Who has paid for you?

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 25, 2012)

This is one of those problems where a picture (or in this case, two comparison pictures) speaks a thousand words. Seeing DPreview's studio test shots from the X10 and the LX5, I think we should all be thankful that DPreview is on the case! Whether anyone thinks this characteristic of the X10 is a problem or not, consumers should be made aware of it. Then they can decide for themselves whether it's a "molehill" or a "mountain" of a problem. So in that respect, DPreview is doing the photo enthusiast public a great service by covering this issue.

12 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Actually old son, I graduated from Cambridge University in 1999. Depending on which survey you read its somewhere between 1-6 on the best universities in the world. Where did you study? Please, I'm interested. My life won't be complete without knowing.

Who do you work for Hunter? Please let us know.

To the point about comparison pictures, you are right, I'm sure if you magnify a picture big enough you can see issues. I'm sure if you turn up the volume on a NEX-5N video loud enough you can hear clicks. Doesn't stop the NEX-5N from being a great camera though. Hell, my A900 is noisy at high ISO. It does produce the best quality pictures I've ever seen though.

Anyway, when you've grown up and got a life, please do let me know.

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Even Fuji needs solicitors. More and more I should think.

1 upvote
aeneon
By aeneon (Feb 26, 2012)

Yes, ORBs dont exist to people whose heads are buried up their own butts or Fujis.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

I don't actually give a toss what you believe old son, I'm sorry if you've formed the mistaken impression that I do. Would you like me to go and get my degree certificate from the attic and post a picture?

I do love the idea that no one in the universe is allowed to like this camera. If I believed half this cr*p I swear I'm surprised it didn't just spontaneously combust when I opened the box.

I actually don't disagree there is a problem in very planets in alignment type conditions. However, when I saw orbs on a picture it didn't look anything like the link in your post. Some might say your link looks like something a 12 year old cooked up with a copy of picasa, but I would never be so cruel.

I repeat my question, who do you work for?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

"old son"?

Are you sure this isn't parody?

And a solicitor who doesn't understand libel?

There is zero reason to assume those orbs in that picture are fake.

Nor are these

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&message=40595215

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Genius. Shall I post up all 1,000 photos I have without orbs? What does that prove? Nothing.

If you own the camera and you experience an unacceptable problem, just ask the retailer or Fuji for a refund. If you get no joy then make a claim. Just stop boring the ass off me and other owners who are perfectly satisfied with this camera.

GaryJP, last time I checked someone has to have a reputation to be the subject of Libel.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

And you are in law?

It isn't as simple as that even in the case of a pre-existing bad reputation, and you should know it.

Newspapers have been sued for libel even when the person previously had NO public identity. And lost.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Hunter, keep your tin hat on old son. Tell us, how many gunmen were there on the grassy knoll?

Gary, my comment in relation to libel was a joke. It was obviously lost on you, for which I apologise.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

"Just stop boring the ass off me and other owners who are perfectly satisfied with this camera."--

Hey, sgoldswo. No one is forcing you to be here. Did someone lock you in a room and force you to read these comments? If it bores "the ass off" of you, then just move along.

As for what DPreview is doing, I think it's a great public service to anyone who might be interested in buying this camera. It lets these people know what they're getting into, and allows them to make an educated decision. That's what a site like DPreview should be doing! Thank you, DPreview!

0 upvotes
raztec
By raztec (Feb 26, 2012)

@sgoldswo Keep it up sir. You are showing real intelligence here. You asked: "tell us how many gunmen were there in the grassy knoll?" House Subcommittee on Assassinations concluded: "Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that at least two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations#Conclusions_regarding_the_JFK_assassination

Now how deep is your head buried up your...??

0 upvotes
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 26, 2012)

@sgoldswo;

You are one of the worse spoken solicitor I have encounter in a long time, if this is what a Cambridge grad is all about, then I am making sure my boys are not going there. BTW, I do have a nephew who is a REAL working solicitor and graduated just few years ago from Cambridge, he sure doesn't talk like you.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

@Jmmg, I think you'll find it's "worst" and "encountered". I would imagine your nephews tone to people he come across is moderated by what they say to him, just like me...

Keep your tin hat on Hunter. You are such a genius you must have been to MIT old son...

@Raztec, genius old son, you are making my point for me, keep it up

0 upvotes
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 27, 2012)

At least, I am not the one to claim that I am educated from Cambridge,pal you are. How low can you go, down to attacking my English skill now? Yeah, English is my second language, so, you want to argue with me in Chinese or Japanese, what you can't! Wow, My nephew graduated from Cambridge and he can speak more than 5 different languages, you can't? let see how good your Chinese or Japanese are, moron.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MIKE GG
By MIKE GG (Feb 25, 2012)

"we're still working through this issue" ... WHY?
its fuji who needs to work on it

3 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 25, 2012)

they had to leave it open at the end, obviously for legal reasons

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 26, 2012)

@Frank C. - Whhaaaaat? Legal reasons...? I said we're still working through the issue because... we are.

2 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

Lawlz...first off you have to own the camera to sue. Most of the people griping about this don't own the camera.

second...you had the opportunity to return it.

Lastly, don't buy fuji camera if you don't like them.

0 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 26, 2012)

to Britton: if you're 'still working through the issue' why are you posting your findings now (??)

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 25, 2012)

If you are limited by orbs, the problem isn't the x10, you just suck at photography, and the x10 was above your talent level anyway.

2 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Sigh.

Yet AGAIN,

If you spent $600 on a tv and certain channels had white specks all over the picture would you be happy and see nothing wrong as long as you didn't watch those channels? Would you tell the people who did watch those channels "My tv works fine" with the implication that there's no problem with the tv and they just didn't know what they were doing? Or would you consider the product defective?

This has nothing to do with ones skill or style as a photographer. The sensor is defective. Just because some people choose to buy and use the camera anyway doesn't chage that fact. It's just that some people expect a product that costs $600 to function correctly and some people apparently don't mind if it doesn't. Either way it says nothing about their skill as a photographer.

6 upvotes
shutterbobby
By shutterbobby (Feb 26, 2012)

How arrogant can one be!!! The X10 is an overpriced P&S which cannot even handle simple scenes with intense light or reflections

8 upvotes
cam shooter
By cam shooter (Feb 26, 2012)

Nakeddork, I fully agree. Looks like some people here bought the X10 thinking it would improve their poor and basic photography skills. Now that they realize they still suck at photography, they sit in front of a pc all day and night ranting that the camera is the problem.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

You would swear to god, if you removed the description of the camera etc, that this is a debate about the legalisation of drugs, the fox hunting ban or the provision of public health services.

I can absolutely believe some people hate the camera and/or have had faulty units. Why does that mean no-one is allowed to like the camera?

0 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

The unit isn't faulty. Stop crying and learn to use it. The problem isn't the orbs, the problem is that you lack creativity, photographic insight, and lack confidence to get out their a make something with it.

The x10 is a high end hybrid Point-n-shoot, if you toads had any photographic insight you'd of known that before buying the camera.

Yet, I don't think most of you own one any way, and ride the hype train with no hands-on merit.

God, the orbs are such stupid issue. The real issue is people that bitch about this camera had way to high expectations and/or its way over their skill level.

All cameras have their quirks. My D700 has horizontal banding at high ISO, my hasselblad produces a crap load of hot pixels on long exposures, my D40 doesn't have a screw drive, the orbs off x10 is less trivial than all those flaws.

Man, if you guys practiced photography as much as you whined maybe you'd take some good pictures.

If you don't like the camera don't buy it or sell it if you did.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

Wow, nakeddork, you should write Fuji's PR material. They should hire you to write their response to this orb issue. I'm sure that would gain Fuji a lot of fans!

The problem with these orbs is that they are probably the most obvious and glaring digital imaging artifact to appear in any digital camera in the last few years. Pure white, perfectly round orbs that can be quite large. The human eye is naturally drawn to the bright spots in a photo, so these orbs naturally draw your eye to them because they ultimately become the brightest spots in an image. That's what makes this issue so bad. Most other sensor issues usually require a bit of pixel peeping to see. Not so with these orbs.

2 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

OMG...you're such a tool. Come on, you rip off Hunter S Thompson's name and call me a non-thinking sheep? Come on be original.

Are you a teenager? You certainly have the wit of one.

Do you seriously think I work for fuji, or really care about branding their product?

Be honest with me. Do you actually own this camera?

The person you have contempt with is yourself...mostly for being a twit, but you also lack the skill to work around a trivial and rarely occurring anomaly.

Just wipe your tears away, un-bunch your panties, Pick up a beginner's photography, and begin your journey into the learning photography.

The x10 is great...you just suck.

Hey, I have no contempt for you at all. I'm actually trying to help you out...you definitely need it.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 26, 2012)

@nakeddork , so what exactly is the "work around" for this issue? Just don't shoot anything with bright highlights? And why is it that no other cameras have this issue, and therefore don't require a "work around"?

2 upvotes
nakeddork
By nakeddork (Feb 26, 2012)

Turn up the ISO, bump the DR, lower the resolution, frame the shot differently, don't blow out the highlights by more than a stop...

...most of these things you should be aware of when shooting anyway.

I primarily shoot my x10 at night, with artificial point lights in the background, and orbs aren't a problem for me at all. Hell, even when they are in the shot they aren't noticeable...and if they are your obviously don't have a interesting subject.

I really don't understand how anyone that considers themselves a photographer can't find a way around it...in the rare case it does happen...without some basic photographic sense.

Do you own the camera?

0 upvotes
Jimmy G
By Jimmy G (Feb 25, 2012)

I posted a few questions for DPR about some test anomalies here at...

DPR X10 Side-By-Side Orb Test Anomaly: Fujifilm Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&thread=40723402

...I would be curious for some feedback from you at your convenience.

Best to you,
:)

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 25, 2012)

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/648896439/photos/1768126/musiker

my wife today € 2 to a street musician - I look to the sky and hope on a inspiration from FUJI

2 upvotes
Jim Evidon
By Jim Evidon (Feb 25, 2012)

DP Review gave an important criticism about a new camera; the Fuji X10.
DP Review continued to pursue the issue out of a necessary obligation to it's viewers/users. I congratulate them for not letting this issue die.

Fuji has been long known for producing cameras with superior workmanship and finish and after I looked at the X10, I believe that they continue to do so. Their products are priced higher than the competition, but the fit and finish is of a higher level as well.

They came out with a new sensor design, which, on paper should produce a superior image. In most respects, it seems to do so.

In this case, Fuji will have to redesign the sensor to correct the problem.

The camera appears to be better than it's competition, at this point in time, when it comes to most situations, so buy it or don't.

I the meantime, please keep your comments objective and your language up to the standard of this very fine website and forum. Words like "crap" and "s--t storm" add very little.

7 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (Feb 25, 2012)

I see you use Groucho as your photo and you obviously share his wry sense of humour. It is clever to write something like this which looks at face value to be a serious comment.

5 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 25, 2012)

I have my X100 yesterday sent to the service: stuck on f2.0
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The X10 is working well - comparatively 6 orbs, 4500 no orbs

Fuji is especially

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

I think these Canon G1X orbs match the X10 ones at ISO 400.
http://g3.img-dpreview.com/D91DECE73AF1483A82BC0D2C0C372C62.jpg

It seems GaryJP has searched and found ORBS on his new CANON PowerShot G1 X, back in the beginning of February. The link above is to one of his Canon G1 X gallery images.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes - this orbs . . . I am pleased that Fuji is not alone

1 upvote
mohphus
By mohphus (Feb 25, 2012)

I have a degree in orbs, I've looked so much into this I can assure you that it just ain't like what the X10 can produce. Here is a link to my orb infested photo for you to compare.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&message=40595215

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

BZZZT WRONG. Not orbs. Nice try though. Next people will be placing bokeh highlight pics...

3 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 25, 2012)

S**t, I think I saw orbs on my A900 RAWs...

and then I got a life

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Max joined DPReview as the X10 came out. His frst post was on it. It's been his non-stop mission to show the world there are no orbs (even though they are in his own photos) ever since.

That's a bad picture. It has bad flare. The lights on the left ARE spherical globes, NOT Fuji orbs.

The problem with the X10 is you never can tell.

4 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Feb 26, 2012)

clearly on the left are orbs - clearly
G1X can also

0 upvotes
lightandday
By lightandday (Feb 26, 2012)

This is all about FUJI X10 and ORB's - the fact that the other camera may have something that resembles ORB's is nothing to do with FUJI's X10!!!!!

1 upvote
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Feb 25, 2012)

It seems Fuji has taken a leaf from Pentax, with all these design and/or QC issues and in communication as well as taking the best action to preserve customer confidence. The sticky X100, the over-heating HS20, the orbs in the X10 and X-S1. It is amazing how this orb problem was not detected in system tests before it is released, how?, and if it was, how the release could be allowed? What were they thinking?

Don't get me wrong. I love the innovations from Fuji, but again and again, all the brilliant ideas did not mean so much success and also not so much satisfaction for their customers as should be. Are Japanese attitude, work ethics and pride, that gave us reliable Toyotas and Sony TVs that set such high standards lost, and companies are starting to do it cheap and take unnecessary risks these days? The fraud at Olympus and the leaking nuclear reactors also show not only taking short cuts and risks, but also an honesty issue of such a scale, it does not inspire any confidence.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
evogt500
By evogt500 (Feb 25, 2012)

Nuclear reactor was made by General Electric USA. It had many flaws.

0 upvotes
walberty
By walberty (Feb 25, 2012)

Try again ! It survived the quake and the tsunami, both of which were historical in strength! How could it have faired any better given it's age, dated design and insane location? You have to be joking right? The power company refused assistance from the U.S Navy to power the aux water pumps. Once those gave out they could no longer control the plant and it eventually went into meltdown. They BSed their way through it in order to save face, but it could have been avoided. Horrible tragedy.

2 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 25, 2012)

A nuclear power plant built along the coast at sea level to boot in a country were tsunamis are a continual threat, was that GE's idea as well? Back-up water pumps also placed at sea level ....helllooo... why not higher up on a secure structure or even in the hills behind the plant?

0 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (Feb 25, 2012)

The X100 problem is way more important than the X10 problem. The camera is completely disabled (stuck on f2.0), and it is twice the cost of the X10. Many have had to send it twice and three times to fix.

I like the X10 pictures I am getting. I see no orbs in my pictures. They must be rare.

But to have a $ 1200 X100 stuck on f2.0 after 12months of warranty, that is a problem.

2 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 25, 2012)

Sensors are funny. The cells within pixels do not uniformly detect all frequencies of light. Some "neon" colors really put a lot of energy into the pixels.

The "blooming" effect is a bit different. There is bleeding of energy into neighboring cells, which gets amplified by the on-chip circuits.

Because the fuji orbs are especially pronounced at reflections (although I saw pics of car headlights orbing and almost doubling the headlights), it appears the fuji sensor circuits are especially sensitive to polarized light. So, although technically one can use a polarizer (not possible w/ X10) to cut down on particular geometric sensitivity, it also points to a fundamental sensor problem. Fuji plays a lot with sensor geometry (hey, they say, it's different and "better" than Bayer) but it seems their knowledge of physics is wanting.

It is likely that internally fuji thinks it is a small problem, but I'd extend their incompetence to all of their sensors.

4 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 25, 2012)

Car headlights and many street lights use reflectors, so their light should be polarized too. Maybe you're on to something here?

0 upvotes
Andrew Higgins
By Andrew Higgins (Feb 25, 2012)

At last, not just a rant, but a post which considers the technical reason behind the problem! Given that no other camera has been mentioned with a similarly pronounced issue, that leads us to think that the actual sensor pixel layout is the root problem. So this could be a difficult thing to correct with firmware alone.
I was very keen on buying an X10, as it seems to be the right camera for the photos I like to take, but the 'orb-gate' issue does make me think twice, given the camera's price...

1 upvote
golautywyll
By golautywyll (Feb 25, 2012)

Andrew - hear hear!
Oneguy - "it appears the fuji sensor circuits are especially sensitive to polarized light. So, although technically one can use a polarizer (not possible w/ X10) ..." - Surely for the purpose of investigating this possibly key observation, it's possible on a static rig to position a polarizer in front of the lens?
Over to you, Barney and Kelcey !

0 upvotes
shutterbobby
By shutterbobby (Feb 26, 2012)

Have tried with polarizing filter on X10,no difference with regards to orbing,from my tests the angle the light hits an object decides if orbs appear?maybe someone knows why--could it be the lens/sensor relationship?

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 26, 2012)

I guess, Shutter, that you've rotated the polarizing filter and got several pics in.

As a follow-on, can you see the orbs on the display?

Also, if you look at the first pair of dpr pics above, there are other areas that look severely degraded. The hook (the threading eye) of the decoration lacks detail and has false colors, too.

I don't have X10 or LX5, but LX5 is "stubbornly" sitting at $500 here in Prague.

Finally, the picture of a point light source forms a 6-pointed star. If the fuji pixels are in the hexagonal geometry it could feed the energy right at the pixels in that 60 degree spread. The star burst, big or small, could be related to a lens (coating), too. There is plenty of art in good cam design and my expertise runs out at about now.

0 upvotes
aniramca
By aniramca (Feb 27, 2012)

I found that the "orb" like object sometimes related to out-of focus issue (or some problem with the AF with the flag comes up). In this case, and in my camera, they appears more like a round bokeh.

I am just wondering if such a problem can be solved by making it into a star. Just like the old way to remove red eye problems... you just replace the red dot with a dark colour representing a non red eye pupil. I wonder if the same remedy can be applied, by replacing the "orb" with a star (of difference size). I even wonder if there is already third party softwarethat can do this.
The orbs did not bother me at all. I usualy can work around it. But again, I am not a professional.

0 upvotes
FulviaZagato
By FulviaZagato (Feb 25, 2012)

Is Fuji the company that will buy and rescue Olympus' camera division?
I think not.
Fuji should consider buying Olympus' camera division to fill out and rescue their own camera division. I really loved the Fuji P&S 40i and 401 cameras of the early 2000s- they were on top of the heap then. But starting about 2005, the Fuji cameras started losing their edge. The F50SE was just average, no better than a Kodak camera and I switched to Canon ELPH for P&S. Fuji hasn't had a DSLR in years.
Olympus would be perfect to fill in the upper end of the Fuji lineup.

1 upvote
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 25, 2012)

If Fuji were interested in buying Olympus, it would be for the endoscope business, not the cameras. Fuji make X-Ray and other optical diagnosis equipment; buying Olympus would make them dominate the medical imaging business.
On the other hand, if they bought Olympus Imaging Co., we could end up with an Olympus OM-D E-M6 with beautiful, fat orbs and sticky blades...

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

News media presenting the news in a way that influences the news is hardly objective. People only complain when it doesn't affect them positively. In this case, DPR is adding to the pressure on Fuji to address this issue in an adequate manner. Y'all haters need to back off and appreciate the service that DPreview is actually doing everyone here!

Thanks DPR!

1 upvote
Michel Fury
By Michel Fury (Feb 25, 2012)

Just in case have a look at this to understand

http://www.flickr.com/photos/playthemagictorch/6773830898/in/photostream/lightbox/

0 upvotes
FulviaZagato
By FulviaZagato (Feb 25, 2012)

Has anyone reported this Orb problem in the X-S1 Fuji superzoom, which reportedly has the same sensor? If not, the problem may not be specific to the sensor. It might be due to the X10 sensor/lens interaction.

0 upvotes
FulviaZagato
By FulviaZagato (Feb 25, 2012)

Then it must be the sensor alone, rather than an unfortunate sensor/lens interaction. This is very bad for Fuji.

0 upvotes
vaper
By vaper (Feb 25, 2012)

Formulate
Untenable
Justifications
Ignore
Facts
It'll
Loose
Money

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

Does anybody have any raws of the orbs? I'm curious if they clean up or even exist in raw. If they can be processed out in raw, then there is the potential for a software fix.

0 upvotes
Rotareneg
By Rotareneg (Feb 25, 2012)

Yep, Imaging-Resource has a X10 raw photo with orbs. I converted it with dcraw without demosaicing here: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7011/6837739447_b8c26636c1_o.gif

It's a two frame animated gif because the raw files actually contain two 6 MP images.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

Ooch, good eye! Yeah, that's odd how it doesnt' show up in the high ISO pics. Although it would seem it's a hardware issue, the raw files are still made by processors interpreting analog information off the sensor.

The question is, is this software something that can be reprogrammed through firmware? Time will tell...

0 upvotes
frosti7
By frosti7 (Feb 26, 2012)

Shot in Orbtown

0 upvotes
LaFonte
By LaFonte (Feb 25, 2012)

While I still don't know who is shooting night scenes in ISO 100, still the Camera B is definitelly ugly...

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

People who have tripods and/or want motion blur shoot night scenes at ISO 100.

0 upvotes
Ignat Solovey
By Ignat Solovey (Feb 25, 2012)

Fast glass anyway doesn't help if you want to shoot night stills with tripod, since depth of field matters here.

0 upvotes
Earthlight
By Earthlight (Feb 25, 2012)

When the light goes down, ISO goes down. Not everybody always crank the ISO to the max. There are other ways.

2 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 25, 2012)

So, LaFonte, you don't know who is shooting night scenes in ISO 100? Let me answer that for you: EVERYONE who shoots static objects at night with a tripod, or want streaking effects. That's a lot of people, pros included. You see, unless you have a Nikon D4 or a Canon 1D (or a medium format camera), it's the only way to keep noise down low.
Now here's another surprise for you: the kind of photography I just mentioned demands narrow apertures. Yes, you read it right: shooting at night with narrow apertures. Who'd say that? Actually, that's called 'law of reciprocity': in order to use slow shutter speeds, you have to stop down. And you'll get them anyway if you shoot in S (or Tv) mode with low shutter speeds.
Have you had enough surprises for today?

0 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 26, 2012)

You don't understand reciprocity!

0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 26, 2012)

skyfotos, are you replying to LaFonte or to me? If that's to me, I'll be glad to learn from you. I thought reciprocity meant a large aperture implied a short time value, and vice-versa (i. e. a narrow aperture is needed when using long time values), in order to obtain correct exposure. If I'm wrong, every book I read and every seasoned photographer I talked to - including the photojournalist whose workshop I attended last November - are wrong too. As far as I know, a large aperture with a slow shutter speed produces overexposure, and a narrow aperture with fast shutter speeds results in underexposure (ISO is not called for here). Are you telling me I'm wrong? What am I missing, then?

0 upvotes
MrMotivations
By MrMotivations (Feb 25, 2012)

My Bias: favourable towards Pentax, Fujifilm. Canon, Panasonic in that order.

I wish to express my appreciation to DP for its due diligence in the x-10 matter. I find their report to be balanced and fair. It is very easy to insite reactions from true believers, of whom I am not. I have more lenses than good sense, have not a clue what I talk about, and will likely provoke no write worthy controversy.
Pitty the fool who has to read all this backwash, even if paid to do so.
Lovin' my defective X-10 !!!

5 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Still posting mental tosh Hunter?

0 upvotes
Van du Nord
By Van du Nord (Feb 25, 2012)

I tried again to obtain orbs. No success even in straight sunshine or the sunshine reflected on the varnish of a dark car. Can somebody help me to obtain orbs.....
Probably not all cameras have the problem

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

Appears to be point lights. Try some christmas lights or chromed objects.

0 upvotes
Van du Nord
By Van du Nord (Feb 25, 2012)

Hi micahmedia, I tried typical situations where orbs have been observed also chromed objects. I don't obtain orbs with my X10 received 5 december. In any case I do like the other upgrades.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

Mine was received on Xmas day. It orbs.

Spot the orbs here.

http://g4.img-dpreview.com/8D0E1042938D4AF9B448E1E1B5750559.jpg

0 upvotes
friedduck
By friedduck (Feb 25, 2012)

This reminds me of banding issues several DSLRs have had over the last few years at high ISOs. Unless you specifically shoot night cityscapes how is this a big deal? I shot with a friend's X10 and it was amazing. Best-handling camera I've tried in a very long time

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

It a big deal because people bought the camera with the reasonable expectation that it would preform like every other compact on the market in regards to specular highlights. It's a big deal because at best Fuji still won't come forward and make sure everyone at least knows the camera doesn't preform the same way with specular highlights as every other compact on the market does. At worst Fuji has been knowingly selling a defective product.

So yes it is a "big deal."

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Feb 25, 2012)

I don't think anyone is objecting to the handling of the camera.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 26, 2012)

I've had cameras with banding issues, but they only really show when you underexpose and push up on post-processing to compensate.

Orbs show both on RAWS and straight out of the camera.

0 upvotes
Ibida Bab
By Ibida Bab (Feb 25, 2012)

Isn't there a Warranty Repair on these?

0 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (Feb 25, 2012)

Sorry DPReview, junk is junk.

Your hope about which production run a camera came from shows just how much catering there is toward manufacturers when it comes to testing their equipment.

DPReview should call for a recall of the camera to protect the interests of those who read/visit DPReview - us photographers of all stripes.

Talk about sugar coating a finding.

And you will continue researching this matter? For what end?
It is better to use your resources testing other new cameras.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

The trouble is if DPReview actually was honest and objective in cases like this, manufactures would stop sending them cameras to test and they would be all done. This is why it is hard to find a negative review of ANY product from a major publication or review site. Plus they have a vested interest in cameras selling since they are owned by Amazon.

10 upvotes
DougRight
By DougRight (Feb 25, 2012)

Your beef with dp is that they are objective rather than reactive. They reported the problem accurately and timely. The forums are for you to 'rage up' as it were by the very hosts you think are in bed with the industry .

I use the google chromeweb browser, and it has this excellent feature whereby it takes me only to the web sites I like. I bet you have the same feature on yours.

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

But DPR isn't being objective. If they were they would have flat out told people not to buy the camera.

It is defective and the manufacture wont even admit it beyond quietly releasing an ineffective firmware update while at the same time they continue to sell a defective product to unsuspecting buyers.

The camera is defective which makes all other aspects of it's preformance and features irrelevant.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 25, 2012)

Actually, DPreview appears to be taking the diplomatic stance of showing you that this could possibly be a hardware issue and letting you decide. If this is a hardware issue, it's clear that the camera is to be avoided! I was pretty convinced this was a purely software issue, but this test has shown otherwise. Kudos to DPreview for using their access to multiple cameras and clout to present this issue in a public way. Perhaps it will motivate Fuji.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Jesse Crandle
By Jesse Crandle (Feb 25, 2012)

I agree with micahmedia. If the fault isn't a big deal for you then buy it, if you want to nit pick every problem in existence that's your prerogative as well. Not to mention if DPreview started telling you what camera to buy you don't think everyone here would start calling them fan-boys of a brand that consistently makes good products? If they said "Buy this Canon/Nikon it's the best" everyone would say they were discriminating. Them NOT telling you what to buy but offering what they've found with each camera to be a fault is what makes this site great. Your failure to rise above herd mentality because you want to be told what to do is not DPreviews problem.

1 upvote
Jakubo
By Jakubo (Feb 25, 2012)

The article main picture Sooo looks like James Bond intro :)

2 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Feb 25, 2012)

I actually dont see any problem at all.
If I buy the camera,
I am not happy ,
I take it back to the shop,
get another brand,
go back home,
I am happy
Keep on shooting.
where is the problem?

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

many people missed the return window either because they didn't' noticed the problem right away or because they were waiting for the firmware update.

Plus fuji has been knowingly selling defective products for months.

4 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Feb 25, 2012)

The problem is that it's a damn shame about a otherwise great camera and were all just hoping for Fuji to do better i guess.

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Not every country has the same return laws. It's not an option everywhere. Particularly if Fuji say it's "in spec".

3 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Feb 26, 2012)

I guess also we are in a society where image is more important that anything else, just see the iphone 4 antenna, people I know didnt care at all and bought it anyway, same as people with fuji, hoping in a firmware update.

1 upvote
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 26, 2012)

Finally some common sense..

Gary, I think you'll find that most places do have very similar customer return laws when it comes to defective items

0 upvotes
maboule123
By maboule123 (Feb 25, 2012)

Fuji has 3 big problems:
1- Having ignored EARLY salespersons and first buyers who reported this anomaly to their local distributors, just DAYS after the camera became available over the counter.
2- It wasn't UNTIL it was publicly known, and thanks to forums like this one, that the company gave little signs of waking up from their stupor upon the matter. Then they began to dance and prance promising to look for a feasible solution while buyers were left with a highly trumpeted little camera who could, but was gaining devaluation by the minute. Then came reports about the shutter blades...
3- Fuji did not the honorable thing: Give the customer the choice of reimbursing their invested money or make a TOTAL recall of the camera in order to keep its reputation of a 'made in Japan' product.
The biggest problem Fuji has now is: LOST CONFIDENCE from buyers.

6 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (Feb 25, 2012)

As bad as that sounds, it is actually a bit worse than that. The sample images from the camera contain ORBs.Thus, the team that built it already knew about it and released it anyway.

6 upvotes
FredW
By FredW (Feb 25, 2012)

To me, there's a bigger issue here. I'm ok with the orbing levels of my Jan 2012 x10 but I would not be ok with the x10 orbing levels I've seen in many of the online postings here and elsewhere.

It appears that there has been a significant, unpublished sensor change or sensor batch variance. I think this helps also to explain the split on the forum regarding the x10. The x10s are performing at different levels depending on when they were produced.

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Good I hope fuji did clandestinely change the sensor. That way it will be easier for the X10 buyers who got defective sensors to win in court.

0 upvotes
FredW
By FredW (Feb 25, 2012)

Hi Josh, yeah that's pretty much my point. Pretty cynical, I know.

0 upvotes
Kim Letkeman
By Kim Letkeman (Feb 25, 2012)

I am not one who subscribes to that theory. I think the unpredictability of lighting comes into play there, along with significant buyer's justification issues and the usual sample variations. I would bet a fair bit of money that every X10 out in the wild would ORB if tested by DPReview.

6 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Third wave of denial.

First wave: fans denied there were orbs.
Second wave: they denied they had ever denied there were orbs.
Third wave: now they deny the latest runs have orbs.
And in the fourth wave ....?

3 upvotes
jkokich
By jkokich (Feb 27, 2012)

The fourth wave: Finally, a camera that gives me the orbs I want!

0 upvotes
aeneon
By aeneon (Feb 25, 2012)

The likelihood of Fuji having updated the sensor in newer X10 models or even recalling the X10 in future is pretty much zero.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

If they don't then then everyone who owns an X10 should get a class action lawsuit going. Fuji really doesn't have a leg to stand on in this matter.

0 upvotes
FredW
By FredW (Feb 25, 2012)

Aeneon, I agree regarding the recall, but my jan 2012 x10 performs as well or better than DP Review's better x10. I would not keep a camera that performs like the poorer DP Review camera or like the DCResources x10. I think there was a sensor adjustment or corrected production tolerance problem.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

You haven't seen it yet. You will. Other people with newer serial numbers have.

Anyone who buys it now is a fool, and we should not play a part in suckering them in.

5 upvotes
FrankS009
By FrankS009 (Feb 25, 2012)

Have not worked my way through all the comments yet, but have already decided not to by a Fuji camera of whatever kind, full stop.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

For everyone who seems to think the orbs aren't a big deal and people should stop complaining consider this.

The orbs prevent the camera form being used in situations where the buyer has a reasonable expectation the camera will function perfectly since all other cameras of this type do function correctly in the same situations. The buyer also has a reasonable expectation the X10 will handle specular highlights in the same way that literally every other camera on the market does unless fuji says it doesn't which they haven't.

If fuji made the sensor like this on purpose they had an obligation to tell people it didn't handle specular highlights in the industry standard way as consumers reasonably expected it to. This is no different than a car manufacture not including headlights on this years model and not saying anything about it until buyers complained. Then upon hearing the complaints they just said " I don't drive at night" and "the car is in spec."

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 25, 2012)

wow Fuji assembled thousands of these cameras without even firing off ONE sample shot to see if it IQ was adequate or not, or, maybe they did ....in which case.........

3 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Exactly. I find it really hard to believe they didn't know about this before the camera was released.

3 upvotes
FredW
By FredW (Feb 25, 2012)

x10 serial numbers do matter (posted in FTF to actually gather serial number input)

Recently purchased the x10 knowing full well the orb controversy but was taking a chance anyway. I have not been able to produce any orbs of the nature seen online like with DPReview's 'camera A' or DCResources. My x10 is at least as good as DPReview 'camera B' (better IMHO).

Then I happened upon this post :

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=40590559

I think the internal serial numbers will tell a significant story. There must have been some kind of unannounced sensor change because my camera is very new :

21g00924 FPX 21043112 593130323233 2012:01:10 FBA030214186

That's to say that my x10 was manufactured in January 2012 and I have good confidence in the camera based on my full sunlight and nightime tests.

So let's see those internal serial numbers in the FTF. Maybe the true story will unfold.

Best Regards, Fred

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Danielepaolo
By Danielepaolo (Feb 25, 2012)

Do you find camera B acceptable?

0 upvotes
mediapro
By mediapro (Feb 25, 2012)

Where can we find this internal serial number Fred? I only notice one the door of the battery compartment. Mine is : 21G05892 and me neither could reproduce those famous white orbs... On the contrary i am very satisfied with this nice little camera. Best regards Hans

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Lend it to me Fred. I will show you orbs. I do not buy this. It's just an attempt to add more suckers to the list.

4 upvotes
Discovery Of Light
By Discovery Of Light (Feb 25, 2012)

Dear Fuji...

We know you tried to fix this and now you may be in a little denial. You guys knew good and well about the fly in the ointment a long time ago. If someone from Fuji told me they that they never shot a streetlight with this thing during testing I'd pull out my BS card. What was the big rush to get this thing out before christmas anyway? Does fuji want to be manufacturer that shoots really high, gets everybody excited, all the while knowing your product will FAIL? Seems that way. I'm one of the ones you suckered. Do you also sell used Yugo's? Actually I wanted a G13 or whatever camera came from Canon to replace the G12. Sadly I couldn't wait and was really excited about your offering. You know if you really wanted to save face Fuji, give your X series followers who bought the piece of crap a nice big rebate on the X-Pro 1 maybe throw in a lens. Show us you really give a damn.

1 upvote
lightandday
By lightandday (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm going to wait for a solution that gives me a $700 camera that does the job that one expects - if FUJI can't I want my money back !
They have to act soom !

0 upvotes
wyoming
By wyoming (Feb 25, 2012)

look at the ball in the comparative shot with the lx5: to me it looks like the x10 overexpose the red light.
would be interesting to see what happens putting some filters in front of the lens.

0 upvotes
NikonScavenger
By NikonScavenger (Feb 25, 2012)

I actually wanted to buy one of these cameras because I'm in search of a pocket DSLR alternative (looks like it may be the G1X after all this mess). And all I can tell is that for every photo of the white orbs on dpreview there is one on flickr, or another photo site, that claims it doesn't exist.

I guess it brings me back to the old rule that the uglier the camera is, the better it works... also I wish Fuji had developed their super CCD technology more, I loved the wide DR of the old S5.

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Feb 25, 2012)

Ugly camera, then it must be a Sigma DP. hehe. Quirky and slow and sometimes, fails, but it takes the best IQ images for its size.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

" for every photo of the white orbs on dpreview there is one on flickr, or another photo site, that claims it doesn't exist."

There's an old maxim: absence of proof is NOT proof of absence.

If I show you a hundred photos without a dog, does it mean dogs don't exist?

5 upvotes
mkln
By mkln (Feb 25, 2012)

GaryJP: theorem "if [conditions] then fuji X10 produces orbs"
now if people reproduce the same conditions and there is no orb, the theorem is false.
but I know nothing about this specific case.
Anyway, not great advertisement for the new XPRO1, considering both X100 and X10 have significant hardware issues.

0 upvotes
Reg Flobert
By Reg Flobert (Feb 25, 2012)

The orbs are really a minor problem for me....I love this camera...It records what I want really well and with good controlled noise......

So me? I'm chuffed I bought it....

I also own a GH2 and a 5D mk2 and an Lx3 a welcome addition to my collection and one I carry with me all the time.....

so much venom on this site tsk tsk

3 upvotes
Rob Klein
By Rob Klein (Feb 25, 2012)

The stuff I am reading here at times is just perverse and somewhat ridiculous. I own an X10 and the orb problem for me is minimal or non-existent. As for the fact the people feel ripped off, how about owning a D1H that is useless over ISO 400 or a Canon Mark III that can't focus or track and those cameras were over six times the cost of an X10 and the both Nikon and Canon refused to acknowledge the problem, although Canon did replace my Mark III three times and finally I gave up on it and got a 7D, which is not perfect either. The X10 is fun and I get great images from it. If you don't like it with its little foibles, then do not buy it or return it or use your energy to get the Syrian government to wake up!

7 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

See people like you are the problem. You keep getting screwed with defective products but don't seem to care. Why would you buy a 7D after that fiasco with the Mark III? Why would you defend fuji for selling you a product which has been objectively proven to be defective by several independent sources? Don't you care about the quality of a product you pay so much money for?

2 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Feb 25, 2012)

from the looks of it the Syrian government is very much wide awake unfortunately

1 upvote
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Feb 25, 2012)

So I wish you will get a really prize worthy photo but with a few orbs. Just attach the note you wrote to your submission.

0 upvotes
Jesse Crandle
By Jesse Crandle (Feb 25, 2012)

From what it sounds like you're naming errors with just about every camera on the market which leads to one real conclusion: All man-made products have their pros and cons. Why is everyone here getting so upset over this one minute problem. It's a design flaw, so what? If you bought a Ford truck that was known to have a radiator that goes bad and then it DID go bad would you grovel and complain and never buy a Ford again? Most likely not. Besides even if you did then you'd buy a Chevy truck and find out that they had alternators that were weak and died every 40,000 miles. Pretty soon you'd cycle through all the vehicle manufacturers and *gasp* come to the realization that all products have flaws. If this camera is really great and fits your needs, why not buy it. Rome wasn't built in a day, and the perfect camera wasn't either.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 572
1234