Hugo808: Not too shabby. Certainly not so much of the "compact" look to them.
How does lightroom handle X-trans RAW these days?
"Not too shabby. Certainly not so much of the "compact" look to them. "
Well, even the ISO200 shots are full of oversharpening halos & the corners (and even the left/right borders!) are pretty blurred too. I personally wouldn't bother - you can get better RAW (but not JPEG!) IQ at significantly smaller camera sizes (see RX100 MkIII) and if you do need Fuji JPEG's and controls, the X-E2 isn't much larger, while delivering orders of magnitude better IQ.
"How does lightroom handle X-trans RAW these days?"
Could be better. I still don't recommend it if you need pixel-level quality. C1P, PN and, in many cases, even DCRaw-based apps (e.g., UFRaw) are better. I've posted a lot of comparisons between the latest versions of these apps to the Fuji forum here - see for example http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3720179 for some links.
Menneisyys: Pretty disappointing shots compared to, say, those of the RX100 MkIII.
"I however prefer Fuji's skin tone and color rendition."
Me too. This is why I'm shooting with an X-E1. It delivers orders of better image quality in every respect, even with its 18-55 kit lens.
Pretty disappointing shots compared to, say, those of the RX100 MkIII.
Wilight: Metabones, would you be so gentle to tell me what's the reason behind your prejudice against FUJI/Canon users?
"well fuji doesn't need any speed booster .. do they .. they already have such an amazing sensor for low light .. why they would need more?"
FF lens, anyone?
"also .. m43 is standard leader in videography and such thanks to Pany GHx series.. and Canon got few of the best lenses that can be adapted on this format .."
I'd be more than happy to adapt for example the 10-18 STM Canon on X cameras. Today, it's completely useless as none of the STM lens can be manually focused on non-native bodies.
"In fairness, they do make adapters and speed boosters for the Fujifilm X mount."
They do - but, regrettably, not active ones. Heck, I'd be even ready to pay, say, $300-$400 for a Canon adapter simply powering up the lens so that focus-by-wire works on Canon's own lenses (incl. all STM models) - I'm not even asking for variable aperture or OIS.
Hubertus Bigend: "For now, autofocus is listed as unsupported" – does that mean there are hints that autofocus may be supported in the future?
May be - but, as with the Sony E adapters, you'll need to purchase the next model to have AF (if at all). No free software updates.
The same for the Fuji X mount, PLEASE!
LuBOSS: Here's why I'll never buy X30:I was one of the first owners of X10, I won it in a photo competition (€569 saved).My experience went frome excitement to quite a big disappointment. My main complaints are that despite good overall photo quality, faces are unnaturally skewed towards edges of the picture, supermacro has really very small DOF, difference between dynamic range 100% and 400% is almost none, I never managed to shot 360° cylinder-view panorama even under perfect conditions, and modes such as soft skin or pro focus (bokeh) have very apparent signs of post-processing.Anyway, not to mention the rubber grip that fell off, two main issues are a lot of dust in the lens despite using lens cap + case, and after 2 and 3/4 years the lens got broken - the zoom ring is cracking between 50-85mm and the picture on the lcd is 'jumping'. Turning the camera off is too hard. And the IS seems to be gone.Est. repair cost €260.So I'm not going to risk €550+ for new camera with the same lens :(
"I never managed to shot 360° cylinder-view panorama even under perfect conditions"
Did you use a pano head and a correctly aligned entrance pupil? If you didn't, no wonder you had parallax errors. Only cameras (e.g., iPhones) that continuously sample the very center vertical area of the sensor (instead of stitching much wider shots) can produce almost-flawless panos WRT parallax errors when shooting handheld.
Sergey Borachev: There is little need for this model. Same IQ as all other current models. Only about $50 cheaper than the E-M10 which has a nice EVF. Even if its price should fall more and the difference becomes $100, the EVF alone make the E-M10 more worthwhile. Having to mount and dismount an EVF and the flash in this E-PL7 (which means you can only use one of these accessories) is a clear disadvantage in comparison. I suppose there will always be those who love selfies and who would buy this, even though the E-M10 is so much better.
"Personally, I'd wish Olympus would try harder to include a viewfinder in their "rangefinder-style" mirrorless cameras, like Panasonic and even Sony with their larger sensor managed to."
Exactly. Not everybody likes mini-DSLR-shaped cameras. I myself prefer rangerfinders because of the size advantage. Still, I want EVF's built-in.
locke_fc: I read the piece, and before even reading any of the comments I thought that this reads like something straight out, or heavily inspired by, Fuji's marketing department I'm not saying it is, but maybe writers should consider what the stuff they write may sound like, and maybe put their arguments forward in a different manner. Just saying.
Oh, and my personal take? No, we don't 'need' the X-30 and it adds far too little for a camera coming almost two years after its predecessor. At the very least an upgraded sensor, or a smaller size, or something more substantial than this.
"I read the piece, and before even reading any of the comments I thought that this reads like something straight out, or heavily inspired by, Fuji's marketing department"
Agreed. I would have been much more critical: if they don't have an 1" sensor (as many comments have stated), they should have delayed / cancelled the X30. It's just not as good a choice as the RX100 MkIII.
And I'm in no way a Fuji hater - actually, I love their X system and also shoot with an X-E1.
RadPhoto: where is the GPS? How hard/expensive is it to get a fre&^%$ GPS in Fuji cameras? Just a cheap chinease chip will do the trick!
"The X30 can use the remote fujifilm app where you can add gps coordinates to the photos!"
If it's as bad as that of T1 / E2, then, it's practically useless. Did you follow my advice on checking out the dedicated section in the T1 review?
I don't think you're right.
1, GPS can always be switched off. For example, on the Nikon D5300, there's absolutely no battery penalty of having GPS support onboard if it's switched off.
2, unlike, say, Sony's or Panasonics' WiFi + external GPS support, that of Fuji is REALLY bad. (See for example the T1 review.)
3, built-in GPS (or tethered one via Wi-Fi) is REALLY useful. Then, you can avoid sometimes hours of extra work of synchronizing timestamps.
HiRez: Looks really nice (especially black) but that 2/3" sensor is just too small. Where is the X-E3, X-100T, and X-Pro2?
Hope at least the latter two are announced at PhotoKina. (Albeit I also secretly hope there'll be an X-E3 announcement too.)
Jogger: One-inch superzooms will eat up this market... something like the Panasonic FZ1000 or Sony RX10 makes a whole lot more sense.
"The truth is that the these two targets (superzoomers and enthusiast) are so different.I mean that I cannot think of a consumer who would have a dilhema between a FZ1000 and a Fuji XT1/18-135."
Exactly. Current 1" cameras just can't match m43 cameras' still IQ, let alone X-Trans ones.
"Not the 1" as much as the m4/3 system ... similar IQ (seriously) in smaller packages. "
Let me disagree. Current m43 cameras have significantly better noise performance than 20 Mpixel 1" models - that is, ones using the best possible 1" sensor as of today (and not that of the Nikon 1).
"Probably right now there are not so many that agree with you, but in 2-3 years there will be no point in buying such an expensive slow zoom other the similar (or cheaper) priced 1" superzoom alternatives"
Yup, WRT superzoom DSLR / MILC lenses which only exist because of convenience, probably. Nevertheless, 1" superzooms will never match the IQ of a decent m43 or, even better, APS-C camera with a non-superzoom lens.
"One-inch superzooms will eat up this market... something like the Panasonic FZ1000 or Sony RX10 makes a whole lot more sense."
If you MUST have a one-lens solution, maybe. If you can put up with changing lenses, in no way - even the most basic X-A1 or X-M1 produce WAY better IQ than either the FZ1000 or the RX10.
Menneisyys: Visibly worse corners at the wide end than with the (one stop faster) 18-55 (see for example "DSCF5519.acr "). Definitely not upgrading - waiting for the 16-55 instead.
Of course I know a superzoom won't really be able to match quality normal zooms. This is why I'm sticking with my 18-55 (and possibly with the future 16-55) and put up with lens swapping (I also have the 50-230).
I'm pretty sure it does deliver better corners. I've shot tons of 18mm shots with it and have found the corners excellent.
Visibly worse corners at the wide end than with the (one stop faster) 18-55 (see for example "DSCF5519.acr "). Definitely not upgrading - waiting for the 16-55 instead.