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
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Feb 25, 2012)

I don't have one of these cameras, but it looks to me like the primary problem is sensor pixel leakage, which would explain why lower ISOs have it worse. If so, a firmware fix is not going to make the problem go away.

However, computationally recognizing this defect and artificially replacing the orbs with a synthesized structure is definitely feasible. Here's my 30-second try:
http://aggregate.org/DIT/FujiOrb/before.png
http://aggregate.org/DIT/FujiOrb/after.png

I can probably create a script to automatically do a little better than this. Is this good enough to be worthwhile?

7 upvotes
rodek
By rodek (Feb 25, 2012)

Not bad

0 upvotes
Felix E Klee
By Felix E Klee (Feb 25, 2012)

What software tools did you use?

0 upvotes
tmascolo
By tmascolo (Feb 25, 2012)

This looks great! Thanks for doing something constructive. May we ask how you did this?

1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Feb 25, 2012)

Man, Fuji engineers have been trying to do this for 5 months now. You can get rich, you know that ?

1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Feb 25, 2012)

Got similar results with Gimp and extra "Interpolate" plugin.

0 upvotes
noshea
By noshea (Feb 25, 2012)

Terrific job. Now if only Fujifilm could do it this well! Thanks for the constructive post.

1 upvote
eaa
By eaa (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes, but then comes this woman with her polka dot dress...
And you want her picture underneath the street lights...
Thx for your nice thoughts, but I'd rather see the camera could handle it all to begin with.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Feb 25, 2012)

This was done using the "smart remove selection" (resynthesizer) plugin in GIMP along with a little diffuse masking. I can do *much* better by writing a little code to use a custom-built resynthesizer.

It's actually very similar to "PSF substitution" that I've been doing in my computational photography research....

It looks like there might be enough interest. It shouldn't take more than a few hours to write the code to do this very well. I'd prefer to release it freely, buit don't want to deal with support/porting hastles. I'm leaning toward a simple C program, rather like how dcraw ((the raw converter inside most raw converters) is distributed....

I'll try to do something this weekend. I just got home from having my lab open for the University of Kentucky's Engineering Day open house, so I'm a little tired right now.... Is there a place where I can find a good test set of images? I know there are a few here and various other places on the internet....

1 upvote
wymjym
By wymjym (Feb 26, 2012)

well I sent you a PM this morning with some linkage to my original...and can supply hundreds of others if you like

wj

0 upvotes
lazy lightning
By lazy lightning (Feb 25, 2012)

Leica is replacing the sensors that are cracking in users M9's free of charge. Just sayin...

0 upvotes
Hentaiboy
By Hentaiboy (Feb 25, 2012)

On a $7000 camera...I should think so!

2 upvotes
Robert Hoffman
By Robert Hoffman (Feb 25, 2012)

Canon are still replacing defective Sony sensors after many years, so your $7K camera comment doesn't cut the mustard.

2 upvotes
Dimitris Servis
By Dimitris Servis (Feb 25, 2012)

I've been following this for a while without comment. I will now make 3:

1. Gadget freak trolls are eroding photography feeding their greed on features and their king is KR.
2. I just checked the annual reports of Fujifilm 2002-2011. Don't expect a fix.
3. I will soon buy a brand new perfect X10 for $50.

5 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 25, 2012)

Anybody else out there keeping the fire burning on this X10rb issue?

It seems DReview is the only one carrying the batton.

Google search doesn't bring up any significant active pressure groups on the Fuji brand. No wonder they can't hear. Or notice.

In contrast, there's a group on Flicker that DISMISSES the issue and are all praises and glee with their new cool X10rb!

Are there any efforts to "quash" this issue by the spin doctors?

Will this X10rb thing just die and fade away like a used up blog?

Who will take on corporations to account for their defective merchandise?

.

5 upvotes
Potemkin_Photo
By Potemkin_Photo (Feb 25, 2012)

Fire sale for $99!

0 upvotes
Dimitris Servis
By Dimitris Servis (Feb 25, 2012)

I give you $69.99 for this garbage. PM me for details.

1 upvote
Joe11
By Joe11 (Feb 25, 2012)

If it is just a filter issue, then I wonder how many of you would be disappointed when Fuji adds a strong filter. Then you can compare the close-up pictures of a leaf on a cloudy day and inform that the picture quality was better with the filter before.
Best would be of course, to have exchangeable filters.
But I'm pretty sure that Fuji will not make this for this cheaper class.
So we should be happy with no AA filter or just a weak AA filter.
There are enough other brands with too strong filters.
But is it a filter issue ??

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 25, 2012)

It's not a filter issue.

1 upvote
Motobiker
By Motobiker (Feb 25, 2012)

Fuji should either cease production immediately and withdraw this camera from sale or allow it to be heavily discounted. I'm sure many people will still want it despite this fault.

Current owners should be allowed a very good 'trade-in' allowance on the cameras next iteration. Which should be hurried along. Even if the next is to all intents and purposes identical - only with a completely revised sensor. (assuming that is the root cause of the fault - which seems likely.)

3 upvotes
ktzuguttenberg
By ktzuguttenberg (Feb 25, 2012)

I think it is a nuclear-contaminated sensor (Fukushima greets the world)
One can not exclude Kontaminierug
It could be a plutonium contamination
first-time buyers are already suffering from leukemia?
Now our homes radiate the X10
Strictly speaking, the X10 would be disposed of in nuclear repositories
what does the CIA?

I go today shooting with the X10 - hope to survive

2 upvotes
Joe11
By Joe11 (Feb 25, 2012)

Did you check with a Geiger-Mueller counter tube ?
This might give you some confidence to feel safe.
But also when there is no radiation, I would not exclude such an influence on sensor behaviour completely. These electrical components are very sensitive.

I'm also still wonderung, why there is no or less discussion regarding no AA filter or weak AA filter. Nikon D70 has a very weak AA filter and shows a lot of details therefore, but sometimes also some moire.
Anyhow, I would embrace this issue, if it is caused by no AA filter or weak AA filter, as this will give us more details in the pictures! But who knows ? What is the truth ? Contamination of material or design of sensor / filter ? Fuji, please inform.

0 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (Feb 25, 2012)

I did. The Fujj X-10 emits less ionizing radiation than a granite kitchen counter top, and about a tenthousand times less than a BBQ.

0 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Feb 25, 2012)

tapioca la supercazzola con 3zo scappellamento a destra?

2 upvotes
Rudypol
By Rudypol (Feb 26, 2012)

Here are some x10 pictures i shot in Vegas this week, I will post some portraits on the forum soon. Camera was fine for me.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyp/sets/72157629453398655/

0 upvotes
tinpusher
By tinpusher (Feb 25, 2012)

Thanks for this test.
My Amazon returns window dropped out while I was waiting for firmware v1.03 but I've had enough and have written to Amazon to get a refund.

It's such a lovely camera in all respects bar the sensor but it's no good if you want a single do-it-all travel camera.

0 upvotes
Marek07
By Marek07 (Feb 25, 2012)

This article just illustrates what x10 owners already know...that they own an expensive paper weight!!

8 upvotes
Bob Janes
By Bob Janes (Feb 25, 2012)

Is it possible that the severity of the orb effect is more linked to aperture size than ISO?

0 upvotes
lightandday
By lightandday (Feb 25, 2012)

Serial No.s of X10 used in the test could be helpfull?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Why?

Even people with the newest serial numbers report orbs.

Let's not give people the false illusion that they can buy this thing and avoid it. Fuji have suckered enough of us out of our money.

4 upvotes
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (Feb 25, 2012)

Fuji has "suckered" nobody. It's an unintended engineering issue, and barely noticeable for most users. Let's see how they solve it.

3 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Sorry but Fuji HAS been suckering people. Pretty much every photo with specular highlights will show the problem and Fuji themselves said the cameras are within spec and even laughed at their customers until there were so many complaints and reviews it forced them to admit there might be a problem.

No matter what they say there is no way Fuji's testing didn't reveal this problem before the X10 was released.

Even if you are naive enough to think Fuji didn't know at first, they lost their "innocent victim" status as soon as they kept selling X10's after it was brought to their attention. They have been selling the camera for months knowing it had this defect and without informing their customers of it.

0 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (Feb 25, 2012)

The link "Click here to read page 2 of our investigation into 'white orbs' with the Fujifilm X10" is linked to the wrong page, it goes back to the first page of the article in a new browser window.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Yes. You have to click the Number 2 to get there at the moment.

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

I received the X10 beginning december. On three pictures there were black surfaces instead of "burned out"areas. I have never seen these orbs. After upgrade I took similar pictures, for example the sun and roofs reflecting in a window, by using P as well as EXR mode: no more black areas and no orbs. Perhaps I have a good camera.

1 upvote
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (Feb 25, 2012)

That's not what the whiners here want to hear! I've not seen it either. But clearly there are cameras that have sensors with engineering/production issues. Let's see how Fuji will handle it.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Many would LOVE to hear it, if it were true. What we've seen time after time is people saying they don't have orbs ... until they get orbs.

Max here has claimed no orbs. But others see them in his photos. Maybe it's about eyes, not cameras.

1 upvote
Van du Nord
By Van du Nord (Feb 25, 2012)

I intentionally shot "terrible" pictures using P and EXR modes by shooting directly to the sun, or by taking the sunshine reflecting on a dark car surface a.s.o, but I did not discover any orbs. There are probably cameras with and without the problem.

0 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (Feb 25, 2012)

One thing missed by the article is that only EXR DR at ISO 100 + DR 200 or ISO 100-320 + DR 400 can decrease the size of white discs. You do get a halo from the longer exposed EXR sensor half with a small dark outline in between both halves' highlights, though.

HR DR at ISO 400+ will _not_ decrease its size but instead only put an even uglier dark outline around the already distinct disc. So for shooting highlight/disc prone frames, keep away from DR (especially DR 400).

0 upvotes
millan
By millan (Feb 25, 2012)

Tiny issue? I am already sick and tired of manufacturers putting their bug products on the market just in order to overtake the competition. The customers are then very often persuated by service that it is not an "issue", but "property" of the product. I had similar experience with TV, mobile phone, lens. What kind of strange world do we live in?

24 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Feb 25, 2012)

Not strange world - world full of capitalism and clever marketing.
Less cost - max profit, people fooling PR and so on... ;)
And it will be worse in the future :)

1 upvote
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (Feb 25, 2012)

These kind of unintended engineering issues happen in any society, capitalistic or not. In fact in capitalistic societies this is even more rare since there is far more competition, unlike others where is no competition. Competition is a very good thing you know. Unless you want to believe all companies love to commit commercial suicide.

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Feb 25, 2012)

New product before finishing the tax year = More profit = Better manufacturer results = Stock Exchange in high = shareholders happy = unhappy consumer with a fast Beta product = -600$ in our pockets..., consumer society at its best. We are always Beta testers from this company's, and we pay for that.

1 upvote
echelon2004
By echelon2004 (Feb 25, 2012)

It's going to be interesting to see when summer hits Europe. Can't expose for the highlights by the ocean during summer and definately can't shoot at high iso. Apart from the orbs image quality really looks good up to iso800 I think.

Maybe next time :)

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Really

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6773830898_cd515472a2_b.jpg

Good luck painting that.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

To be able to shoot pictures all my other consumer cams can shoot.

2 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

It's hilarious to me that people want their money back for this tiny issue.

The whole culture of "I'll buy it and if I don't like it I'll send it back opened and buy something else" appals me.

Sadly the X10 is not a camera I need or want, or else I'd see if I could pick one up cheap once all the hissy-fitters are putting them on ebay...

4 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

There are loads of cheap ones around already.

And apologia for lousy manufacturers really are lame.

I guess you think Bernie Madoff and Lehman Brothers' clients got what they deserved too.

Some of us just want a camera fixed, as other manufacturers have done. But I'll sell you mine if they refuse to fix it.

10 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

It uses novel technology, which is inevitably going to work better in some ways than others. The orbs, which should only be an issue occasionally, are a way in which it doesn't work terribly well.

I could live with that, what I can't live with is 28mm length, if it went out to 24mm I'd be interested.

I don't think they can "fix it". I think they can only offer every X10 owner their money back and write off their entire investment in the ones already made.

Would you do that?

Have you ever run a company?

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

What's the novel technology? Fuji have made lots of EXR sensors and only this one screws up in this way.

Whether one can live with this depends on one's likely uses for the camera. It's great for shooting a close-up of a leaf on a cloudy day. It is NOT an all-purpose compact. It will crap out on you in many circumstances that some shooters might encounter more than others.

Other manufacturers provide fixes for their OWN faulty hardware. Fuji instead put that same faulty hardware into ANOTHER model of camera even after they had been informed about the issue.

Yes, I have run my own company for over a decade, have currently suspended it to take on other work for another company (contractual reasons) that actually RESPONDS to every consumer complaint, and would not cheat my customers. I would not even sell my X10 to someone without making them well aware of the screwed up sensor. I guess I'm a tad more ethical than Fuji.

I've never had the option to give my clients shoddy work.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

Well, if you have run a company, you can see the problem. If they can't fix it, they have to either say it is a downside of the camera or a fault. If they accept it as a fault, then they have to write off the production run, and that would mean taking a huge loss and quite possibly killing a division. Or they can say it is a downside and hope ti doesn't cost too many sales. I think they can say "downside" OK. I don't have the camera, but I reckon I could shoot round it, even though my sort of work is what would show it.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Canon have always fixed my Canon cameras' faults.

(Except my XL1 video camera, but they DID try and even invited me to their facility for a day)

Fuji have laughed at users who complained.

I don't recommend anyone to run a company this way.

It is costing them a lot of sales. Not only now, but in the future.

A satisfied customer tells one person. An unhappy one tells dozens. And they don't come back either.

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

As I said, I don't see that it is fixable. If it were were fixable then they would have fixed it.

Does it ruin the shots? Doesn't look like it to me. Poor blown highlight handling, minus one point.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

You don't consider this ruined?

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6773830898_cd515472a2_b.jpg

Or this ...

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=4467

We have very different requirements and expectations of a $600 camera.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 25, 2012)

If the ugly blooming, white burned out orb on specular highlights is a tiny issue for your photography that's your business.

As consumers who are pitched to 24/7, tracked online, marketed to in a constant and unyielding way, of course we have every right to demand a minimum level of performance from goods.

The consumer sheep mentality of accepting any underperforming, defective product is the only thing I find appalling. Retailers say "the customer is always right". Why? Because without consumers businesses wouldn't exist. Criticizing consumers for expecting products to work as advertised is downright bizarre.

2 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

Gary, the only reason I see anything odd about those photos is because I'd been warned. They look perfectly acceptable to me, simply poor clipped highlight handling.

I'd be more interested to see how it behaves in less extreme circumstances.

Again, it takes us back to - what do you want Fuji to do? Assuming it is a sensor issue, the choice is to pulp the whole run and give everyone their money back, or say "That's what it does".

Which do you suggest?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Perfectly acceptable?

An ideal Fuji customer.

1 upvote
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

You can check my gallery for the photography. I've yet to see a single shot supposedly ruined by this trivial flaw I would not have binned anyway. That shot you posted, which sincerely hope is not yours, has no merit whatever, and if the car headlamps had kept their true shape instead of being morphed into orbs, something only someone who knew the shot was done on an X10 and had heard of the issue could possibly have noticed anyway, the shot would have been no better.

Fuss about nothing.

I've never bought a Fuji product in my life. The X10 has always struck me as a notably silly camera.

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

And I let myself get sidetracked again...

What is it you want them to do? Pulp the whole lot and return everyone's money?

0 upvotes
Pbvascon2
By Pbvascon2 (Feb 25, 2012)

>I've yet to see a single shot supposedly ruined by this trivial flaw I >would not have binned anyway.

I owned the X10 for about a week before I returned it. Here's a sample of the orb issue on a perfectly good shot (but no, it would not win any contest).

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/95998448/photos

0 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Feb 25, 2012)

Orbs on the chair wouldn't bother me, but the onr from the car window would. Even so, I'm not seeing a faulty camera, just not a very good one.

Which takes us back to the original Q: does anyone seriously think the cameras should be gathered in and pulped and, if not, what does anyone expect Fuji to do?

0 upvotes
M1963
By M1963 (Feb 26, 2012)

That's because there are people like this Louis_Dobson that crooks thrive.

0 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (Feb 25, 2012)

If I used this camera, pretty much all of my shots would have them, such as reflections off cars in daylight, as people have repeatedly posted, or concerts under backlighting on stage.

It seems silly to crank up the ISO in broad daylight, which I'm seeing people doing and recommending- note how many shots people are taking at ISO400 when one should be using the lowest level possible during bright sunlight.

It is interesting to see how the market fell out. Ebay has liquidations from private sellers, as well as dealers selling used and new ones. So there's certainly an issue.

4 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 25, 2012)

"Needless to say, we're still working through this issue."

"There is more to do..."

You can stop now.

People will vote with their wallets.

4 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (Feb 25, 2012)

My hat is off to you, dpreview. I am one of those "lucky" individuals who waited for the firmware update while my return window passed. The bottom has fallen out on the used market for the X10 so I am essentially stuck with it. Thank you for pressuring Fujifilm about this, they need to do the right thing.

5 upvotes
Hentaiboy
By Hentaiboy (Feb 25, 2012)

16 used from $468.95 on Amazon. Hardly the "bottom falling out of the used market"...

2 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (Feb 25, 2012)

It doesn't matter what they're -not- selling for used on Amazon if I can't get $400 for my mint copy, ie a bigger hit in 4 months than my S90 took in 3 years!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Feb 25, 2012)

I have been using Fuji cameras for so many years, from the 1.5MP FinePix500 in 90's to F200 in late 00's, I never saw such problem.
For sure, the building quality of the "old" Fuji cameras (like F11) was significantly better than F200 because F11 was made in Japan while F200 was made in China. However, the output of F200 still looks good under such lighting condition.

For me, I like to carry a pocketable and light weight camera with reasonable image quality. I definitely would not consider this camera if Fuji has no way to fix the problem.

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

Love the picture at the top of the article: Japan, land of the rising orb!

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Feb 25, 2012)

The same effect like my old Nokia phone camera.
Too bad for such a high-end camera!

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

Two main photographic stores here in Perth Western Australia tell me the x10 is their biggest seller, the largest camera store in Australia is dropping Olympus and taking up the Fuji X series... orbs and all.

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

You do try Max, I'll give you that.

I can tell you that after seeing my samples two camera stores in HK are NOT recommending it to customers at all any more. They worry about returns.

And you should look at Amazon second hand prices too. Even many of the "open box" sales are NOT open box but new, so unless Australians are a bit perverse they are certainly going against the grain.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Feb 25, 2012)

That's weird. Why would they do that to their customers? How mean.

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

I suspect the success of the x10 in Australia has much to do with wealthy US, UK and Hong Kong people coming here to buy their camera without having to run the Orb picket line outside their own local camera stores. Since the x10 there are a lot more Austin Martins buzzing around on our streets, so I guess many are staying.

0 upvotes
lightandday
By lightandday (Feb 25, 2012)

As a West Australian - I doubt this statement !!
unless Fuji Australia is supplying ORB free X10's and you know something no one else knows ? Tell us the inside story please !

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I'd guess anyone who REALLY knew cars would know there's no such thing as an Austin Martin.

And Aston Martins are not favoured cars in HK

Troll on.

1 upvote
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 25, 2012)

@ Max Metz,

You are really gone...are you mate? I am sorry for your delusional psychosis... Ferrari, French blondes, Grand prix and now "Austin Martins"(BTW it should be Aston Martin not Austin Martins) I think you drive a Hyundai hatchback and use a $200 P & S and has no life but watched couple episode of Australia Top Gear then came here to argue with people who actually owned better cameras and have REAL concerns, get a life or shut your mouth, mate.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I own this camera. As I mentioned in another conversation, I can't shoot in my TV studio with it as there are hot light sources. I can't shoot concerts with it as there are hot light sources.

I think even the admirers are going to get a rude awakening when skies get less overcast.

I can't trust it for night shots of Prague or Paris or Madrid unless I will accept high noise levels. And I LIKE night shooting.

I'd better be careful near water on a sunny day or children's birthday party candles.

Almost ALL the good pictures I've seen from this camera, and I have seen SOME, have been low dynamic range like snowy scenes with bright skies, cloudy days, no specular highlights, or a close up of a leaf.

What it certainly isn't and can never be is a carry anywhere, do anything compact. It's a disgrace.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

lol... The x10 fits perfectly in the glove box of my Ferrari 360 Spider, the two French blondes I live with think its a very sexy camera and I find it the perfect innocuous shooter for the Rome and Paris fashion run. It will be with me at the pre Monaco Grand Prix dinner - wonderful.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Ah, so it's a poseur's dream?

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

Sorry JP, Charlotte and Fleur wrote that, they have been playing round with my tablet - they think this is all very funny.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Ah, the internet, where everyone is whoever they want to be.

And a "tablet" too. Oh yes, do you sit in coffee shops with it?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Sorry max, my mate Stephen Hawkings wrote my last post. He likes cameras that work instead of just looking pretty.

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I don't know if he's a shill. But I do know he joined DPReview just as the X10 came out and his FIRST post was about the X10.

2 upvotes
LWW
By LWW (Feb 25, 2012)

What's a "shill"?

0 upvotes
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 25, 2012)

The X10 White Orbs and the Fukushima radiation finally done its damage inside MAX METZ's head, he is gone...............we should have our condolence! ...But wait, it is not the radiation or the Orbs, he was a stubborn nut like to argue for the sake of argument to begin with...

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

Did you do any tests with a different camera (not an X10 but one with similar resolution) in the same conditions? It would be interesting to see side by side what 'normal' looks like to get an idea how bad/distracting the white disk effect is.

3 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Wow did you even read the article?

9 upvotes
Danielepaolo
By Danielepaolo (Feb 25, 2012)

This is a hilarious response.

The first pic is the X10

The second pic is from the X10

The third pick s from an LX5

Get real.

1 upvote
Octane
By Octane (Feb 26, 2012)

Opps I guess I scrolled down over the first shots too fast and just looked at the samples of the different ISO settings. By bad!

0 upvotes
Xiaomao
By Xiaomao (Feb 25, 2012)

I'll skip X10 for sure. X11 or X20 will be my choice.
Fuji is very unlikely to make followed up X series that are infected by orbs.

0 upvotes
Danielepaolo
By Danielepaolo (Feb 25, 2012)

Make sure you are not an early adopter though. Wait until others have looked at it and confirmed no major flaws.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

After how they have handled this issue why would you want to support fuji by buying their products? I would never by any fuji product after this. Unless they do an about face and offer refunds.

1 upvote
Xiaomao
By Xiaomao (Feb 25, 2012)

I only wish Fuji learned a serious lesson this time, listened to X10 owners' requests and reports, and would come up with cameras that we like. I wonder if the unwillingnes to admit a mistake or to correct it is rooted in Fuji's culture. If so, Fuji won't be my choice.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

People often blame "culture" but there have been, and are, Japanese companies where the CEO takes every responsibility on his shoulders, resigns, bows, apologises, and even in extreme cases has committed suicide.

But the boss taking corporate responsibility isn't part of Fuji apparently. Maybe they've learned Western ways and will give themselves a bonus instead.

4 upvotes
gabeb1946
By gabeb1946 (Feb 25, 2012)

Josh 512 & Xiaomao: I'm an "early adopter" of the X100. Dpreview & others, while generally favorable raised about 20 problem points (i'm working from memory). Fuji upgrade corrected the vast majority of them within a couple of weeks. As a shooter for 35+ years I've rarely seen a company respond as fast. My "make money" gear is Nikon, my play gear Leica & Panny/Oly m4/3. Had support issues with all, mostly positive. Fuji is a quality company, heavily into research, and has for many years made extremely high quality products (lenses & Hassies included). I commend Fuji on their past responses, and hope they'll do the right thing, quickly. Yes, I have an X10 and have not come across this problem - yet. I really enjoy my X10. But to say you wish "Fuji learned a serious lesson this time" - have you been a Fuji follower for years? You know Fuji's culture? Have you had Fuji gear? Fuji Problems? I've had good experiences with support, and enjoyed owning three of their DSLRs.

8 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

To quote from another post:

Fujifilm HS10- absolutely horrible until fixed with firmware
Fujifilm HS20- defective temp gauge, fixed with firmware
Fujifilm F500EXR- legendary for de-centered lenses. No fix.
Fujifilm F600EXR- Ditto, no fix.
Fujifilm X100- Sticking aperture blades, fixed at repair shop
Fujifilm X-S1- Drooping lens when extended, orbs, blue spot when lens stopped down.

Good reliability record?

And you don't see orbs.

Yes, you're Fuji's ideal customer.

3 upvotes
skimble
By skimble (Feb 25, 2012)

Shame on you Fuji, I'm a proud X100 user after I returned my X10 for other reasons then the orbs but for sure if I would buy and use a $700 (that's what I paid new) camera I would expect it to work reasonable good in all situation.
At least offer a reasonable discount or full refund if the users are bothered by this (in other words su..it up Fuji its not the consumers fault).
Now to the positive site this camera is fantastic apart from this issue and Fuji should build on this and bring confidence back to customer ;-)

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Frankly, unless they offer full refunds and/or free repairs and soon, I can't see how anyone can ever have confidence in fuji again. They haven't even really publicly acknowledged that there is a problem with the camera.

3 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 25, 2012)

Hunter, are you an amateur idiot or is someone paying you?

1 upvote
skimble
By skimble (Feb 26, 2012)

the sensor is not totally defective, it produces one of the most amazing image you can see from a P&S camera. I would not stop a second to encourage anyone who is bothered by the orb issue to return it but I personally had 2000 shots before I returned it and not once I have encountered this orb issue. This does not mean they would not have been produced if I have come into the situation but I could have been a customer who tolerated this downfall. I actually had to force the camera to produce them, just to see if mine model was different from others.
So Mr Hunter I know it all it does not take a genius to understand that the sensor my have a big weakness in this particular area but you can not call it totally faulty.
I go by facts and my own experience's, when others said their is an issue with this orb thing I did not call them words I tried and found that it did look awkward.

0 upvotes
Nuts57
By Nuts57 (Feb 25, 2012)

Thanks for posting a comparison picture beside the X10 picture to see what it should look like. Until they fix this hardware issue, this camera is 'dead'.

5 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Sad thing is that Fuji may well die with the camera. It will be hard for them to get people to buy the X1 pro or any other camera from them after the response or should I say lack of response they have given to this issue.

6 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 25, 2012)

@Josh152 I understand people are disappointed but one camera doesn't have anything to do with the other. It's not a pattern with them, IMHO. And it's not like Fuji did nothing, it's just that the firmware doesn't seem to work. Doesn't mean they won't ultimately address this issue. The Nikon D70 had blooming issues under certain sunrise conditions. Nobody would argue that it's a bad camera. My wife still uses mine, and IQ is great.

Fujifilm has a long history in photography making really nice gear, it would be kind of harsh to give up on them after issue with one camera. Please, no need to write below sticky aperture blades or some other x100 complaint. Personally never had a problem with that camera, it's great.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

marike6, but the company's ATTITUDE about it tells us a lot.

I want to trust them. All they have to do is make right the fact that they ripped me off.

5 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Well we all KNOW what the F U part stands for.

2 upvotes
gabeb1946
By gabeb1946 (Feb 25, 2012)

Hunter I'm not here to defend Fuji but just looking for reality. Did you own all those "horrible" cameras? If yes why would you buy one after the other after the other? If not you're quoting the experiences of others? I've had 6 Fujis over the years (DSLRs) and the X100 - X10. Perhaps I'm just lucky but I've had questions - no failures. Their DSLRS were "the choice" for many wedding photogs - and they don't tolerate failure quite so easily. Fuji has earned a pretty good rep over the years. I certainly understand and empathize with the anger of those with orb problem X10s - but I believe (and hope) Fuji will take corrective action decisively. It certainly does appear to be physical rather than firmware fixable.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

"Corrective action decisively" would have been about three months ago.

And it would not have involved Kayce Baker squinting at lights, saying "I never shoot lights" and "Ow, my eyes hurt".

3 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Feb 25, 2012)

I like the picture of the camera with the large white disk behind it. :)

13 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 25, 2012)

Best Enthusiast Compact!
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Amateur_Photographer_Awards_2012__Winners_news_311263.html

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

You DO realise that all you're doing here is trashing Amateur Photographer?

In the light of this flaw, ANY company or review site that does not address it is "amateur" indeed.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Unless you want to shoot at night in a city.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7065/6773830898_cd515472a2_b.jpg

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

Right now my iPhone is more reliable than my X10.

3 upvotes
shutterbobby
By shutterbobby (Feb 25, 2012)

Nice Job Barney, I returned my X10 (from Nov.) last week after the new Fw did Nothing to alleviate the Orbs..raising ISO is not an option on a small sensor cam with a fast lens, and the store I got it from had a meeting with a Fuji rep. the next day,who would not give a direct answer as to why the Orb problem was not fixed, or even seemed to care!!!So it seems Fuji does not care at all about their customers--no honesty whatsoever--pity as the X10 could of been a great P&S cam for many.Much too much competition out there to release a $600 beta product....

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I've had other cameras with faults. The 1DMkIII had focusing problems. The 5D MkII had the black dot syndrome. Even the original 5D had, in some cases, loose mirrors. All were fixed FOR FREE by Canon. The 1D MkIII had TWO repair fixes.

But I have NEVER seen such a debacle as this, with so glaring a fault so completely pooh-poohed by the company that produced it.

Never.

8 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

Its good to see you comparing the $600 x10 to your full frame Canon gear JP, many full frame Canon and Nikon users have appeared on the Fuji forum after buying & being amazed by this little Fuji x10 camera. They don't often return though, possibly because their original post is dominated by you and others of similar view ridiculing their camera choice.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I'm not comparing cameras. I am comparing company responsiveness to their OWN faults.

1 upvote
gteague
By gteague (Feb 25, 2012)

leitz gmbh has never admitted to their rangefinders being defective in mine and my fellow photographers m3's and my m4 and m4p's.

of course, they were never confronted with the power of the internet flash mob, either .... [g]

/guy

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

This is an excellent article, based on very careful testing and is to be commended.

As a package I have become totally enamoured with this little camera, the orb issue has never bothered me as there is enough benefit in the balance of the package to pretty well blow me away. So for me at least, it makes for a perfect spotters camera, returning to success with a larger sensor camera later.

The x10 will capture the interplay of diffuse light in bright light and perform very indeed in low light - its also a joy to control and use. The camera is solidly made and the lens beautiful.

The 'orb' issue has become a distressing issue for many, so if Fuji change this characteristic for the better I will be pleased for those people - though if they don't, I will still go on very much enjoying mine.

5 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Feb 25, 2012)

That is not true Hunter.

No other small camera gives the dynamic range needed to see the subtle diffuse light, caustics in computers 3d rendering language, no other small camera performs as well in low light and the colour and tone are second to none.

These characteristics allow one to go out spotting for stuff likely to deliver on a much larger sensor camera and perhaps even then on a tripod. There is nothing else like the x10 in this respect - it represents a quantum leap in small sensor cameras.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

A "quantum leap" that gives me worse IQ than any of my Canon compacts from even four years ago.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 25, 2012)

I guess the tests were done to get 12Mp jpg's. Could you repeat the test using 6Mp RAF files?

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 25, 2012)

Done - no meaningful difference.

6 upvotes
shutterbobby
By shutterbobby (Feb 25, 2012)

makes no diff with Raw files,as its a sensor flaw..have tried all possibilities...

2 upvotes
SF Photo Gal
By SF Photo Gal (Feb 25, 2012)

Really kind of a shame. Seem like Fuji was making a comeback with some really interesting camera, but given some of the issues with the X100 and now this, I would certainly give pause to being an earlier buyer of the X-Pro1.

7 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Feb 25, 2012)

Agree, give pause to being an earlier buyer of the X-Pro1, even some conclusions and truths come to surface. Let's see...

5 upvotes
ljclark
By ljclark (Feb 25, 2012)

I cancelled my order for an X-Pro1 (and three lenses). It wasn't so much because of the technical details of the X10's problem, but rather because I no longer have confidence in Fujifilm's ability to communicate effectively and truthfully with their customers. This past week I also sent a letter (real paper, via UPS) to Kayce Baker expressing those concerns, but haven't heard back yet.

I like my X100 (no SAB problems with it) and would like to be able to trust my X10. Instead, I'm going to shelve it and take some time to reacquaint myself with my Ricoh GXR. Certainly not the IQ (or potential) of the X10, but a real shooter's camera.

Meanwhile, I dropped into my local store Wednesday evening and bought an M9 -- moving up from my M8. Certainly more money than the full X-Pro1 kit, but it just didn't seem to make sense to continue supporting Fujifilm's attitude.

7 upvotes
Scotsloon
By Scotsloon (Feb 25, 2012)

I love the fact that LJCLARK just "dropped by" his local camera store and bought an M9. For most of us such a camera is almost the aspiration of a lifetime.

It is great to have rich friends!

0 upvotes
ljclark
By ljclark (Feb 25, 2012)

LOL. The "dropped by" part was easy. The harder part was slowly shoveling money into the earmarked part of the savings account for the past year, figuring out what gear was heading for eBay, and deciding not to go anywhere for vacation this summer.

Dropping by a little before closing also gives me a chance to find out what's on my dealer's mind and how business is. I'm lucky to have a local store with competitive pricing and that also establishes a relationship with the customers. Local camera stores run on slim margins. In all this back and forth and finger pointing with Fuji, we sometimes forget about that dwindling number of local brick-and-mortar stores.

When you have a family to raise, feed, and put through school, you can't waste shelf space on stuff that doesn't sell. That means you have to trust the manufacturers to give you product that works. Does Fuji expect that retailer to look you in the eye and tell you that everything is in spec and the orbs are your fault?

3 upvotes
ljclark
By ljclark (Feb 25, 2012)

DPR,

Thanks for another late Friday news item posting. Sometimes I wonder how much it helps, but this way the article stays on top for a couple of days and gets good exposure over the weekend -- and thus a nice slug of responses from your readers.

The "wonder" comes into play when I look at this mix of technological arrogance and corporate denial, coupled with slow X10 sales and a glut of used/returned X10s on the market.

My local dealer told me that his distributor called him and said that he has plenty of X10s in stock. Unfortunately, so does my dealer. :-(

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 25, 2012)

I had hoped to get this out much earlier but it took a LOT of studio work and much more time than originally anticipated. I'd rather it had been out on Monday, because then I wouldn't have to spend my weekend checking the comments and fixing typos!

3 upvotes
ljclark
By ljclark (Feb 25, 2012)

Barney,

You guys did just fine. Take it easy, make it right. Really, the late release works to the advantage of X10 owners and when Fujifilm gets some customer focus, it will prove to have been an advantage to them also. (They just haven't figured that part out yet.)

But don't you spend much time here on the weekend. Fixing typos is fine, but don't try to fix beliefs. ;-)

3 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Feb 25, 2012)

Honestly, I'd be one of those who would buy this camera, I am glad that I had knowledge of this problem before. Thanks to DPR.
If I had bought, would be as many here, completely pi$$ed.

At least we can enjoy the image at the top of the article the Fuji X-10 in the "Moonlight".

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 25, 2012)

Maybe now everyone saying that the camera is fine and people just don't know how to use it will finally get it though their heads that the orbs are a real, legitimate issue.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 25, 2012)

The sensor on the X10rb is all but junk due to this.

The cost of replacing the sensor on sold and unsold cameras may be prohibitive for the manufacturer, and junking all cameras produced makes them loose more face, pride and profits.

No win situation.

Spin doctors needed to apply ASAP.

(the silence is NOT working)

.

11 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Feb 25, 2012)

They could probably just exchange the cameras, and cannibalize the defective ones or use them for repairs.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo
By sgoldswo (Feb 25, 2012)

Or alternatively, this is a non-issue. Hyped up beyond reason by DPR for reasons best known to DPR and their sponsors.

1 upvote
Ernest M Aquilio
By Ernest M Aquilio (Feb 25, 2012)

Coverage like this may make Fuji work harder to alleviate this defect on an otherwise good camera. Once this gets fixed I will buy one, until then I patiently wait.

0 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 25, 2012)

I have long suspected that there was a variation between cameras. I have used my x10 extensively for three months now and have not really experienced the white discs. I did try to create them and succeeded only in in producing overly large blown out highlights which were not unduly unsightly - I guess they would have blown out on any camera. Shots taken in Venice along the Grand Canal at night show lights with star shaped halos and centres burnt out to various degrees The occasional light directed at the camera (as on an approaching boat) displaying a white disc - which may be, and looks like, the shape of a very bright light. It could be that using a higher ISO and a wider aperture and size M (6Mp) ameliorates the issue.
All in all nothing to worry about. MY camera is a very fine tool that I love using.

0 upvotes
Jmmg
By Jmmg (Feb 25, 2012)

Show us those "Fine" pictures of your, you are BSing.

0 upvotes
skyfotos
By skyfotos (Feb 26, 2012)

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3801075357/photos/1768808/venice

I said the camera was "fine"! Anyway here is my BSing!

1 upvote
Silent Oracle
By Silent Oracle (Feb 25, 2012)

Thank you for the update.

It really sucks to be the Fuji x10 right now.

1 upvote
kapanak
By kapanak (Feb 25, 2012)

Why anyone ever paid $600 for this camera is really beyond me ...

1 upvote
Luego
By Luego (Feb 25, 2012)

DPR Thanks for your effort.

We finally have a clear understanding of the sensor issue.
Naturally all X10 owners were waiting and hoping that Fuji would address this issue with the current firmware version, unfortunately without avail.

X10 owners now have a decision to make. Or can we still hope that Fuji will recall the camera and replace the sensor?

We are looking forward to Fuji's reply.

Luego

1 upvote
Digitall
By Digitall (Feb 25, 2012)

Fuji has to struggle a lot to the next camera that will replace this If they want to retrieve the line. The premium Orbs at premium price.

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

After this, and Fuji's behaviour over it, I would not touch another Fuji product with a barge pole.

4 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Feb 25, 2012)

I understand your dissatisfaction. Have the feeling that we were cheated and still had to pay for it, It is not good reason to be pleased with a product. And don't believe in improvement through software.

1 upvote
SHood
By SHood (Feb 25, 2012)

Did Camera A have a higher serial#? ie. later manufactured date.

0 upvotes
Photonics
By Photonics (Feb 25, 2012)

...just wondering whether an external polarizing filter could sort the whole thing out?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Feb 25, 2012)

I have previously suggested this., Some have tried and said it didn't. Those of us lumbered with this chunk of metal are willing to try just about anything to get it to work to spec. OUR spec. Not Fuji's. They have said they're happy with it.

1 upvote
edu T
By edu T (Feb 25, 2012)

Well carried out experiment, kudos!

An oRbscure point remains to be checked, though… Fuji, on v1.03: “The image area with high brightness might be recorded as ‘black-out’ area, just in case of dedicated shooting condition, This unpleasant phenomenon is improved.”

This is the unpleasant phenomenon (2 independent sightings):
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1012&message=39991863
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=40596911

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Total comments: 572
1234