thejohnnerparty: Why would Canon continue with this line up when they the G1 X platform? Why not improve that one. This one (1/1.7" sensor) makes no sense. And what about the EOS M platform? Small sensor cameras are done. That sensor size has been conceded the smart phone industry! It would seem to me that the 1" sensor is a minimum for point and shot in this day and age. Comment?
Agree 100%. At minimum this camera should have 1 inch sensor. If they pulled the g16 and focused on g1x they would make more money. The eos m is a jewel. But not everyone has desire for interchangeable lenses. Canon would rock the market with a g1x in g16 body with skooth mp4 1080 video.
X-Trans is the latest technology since the ....SuperCCD!
Glad to see them back to Bayer. Wish I would have waited and not taken such a spanking on the X-E1. Xtrans is going to join the SuperCCD at some point.
KLN24: I haven't upgraded my DSLR in years. I own a Canon 5D (original 5D) and it still works wonderfully. If I upgrade it will only be to a used markII, beacause of my budget. But for around the same price I could get the x100s which I would love to have. Unsure whether to upgrade my DSLR or just buy the x100s. Any advice?
Coming from Canon 5D, in my opinion based on previously owning an xe1, you would not be happy. Raw file processing is a drag and the image quality, especially in mixed lighting will yield image quality that will disappoint. I have 2 5dmiis for work and wanted the xe1 as my grab and go.... i was disappointed to sah the least. Gram the eos m and the pancake lens and the ef adapter. The images are outstanding and the video is excellent.
sgoldswo: It's comic the number of people on here who haven't used the camera who are slating it. But then this is the internet... A well deserved result for a great camera with amazing image quality.
I have owned and used xtrans. Xtrans is horrible.
I just reviewed the sample images that Barney took with the original x100. Night and day difference. The x100 images are very good and with good color and detail. X100s is clearly not an award winning camera so why is the dpreview gold being awarded to a jpg snapshot camera that is grossly overpriced?
Unbelievable. This is the first time I have seen such a terrible review. All of the samples are random snaps most likely in auto or program mode and the results are not matching the conclusion. Another point is that the conclusion pros / cons are of little actual value to the reader. Jpegs are excellent? really. A $1,300 camera that is given a Gold Award no less says excellent jpgs. WOW. and that isn't even correct. I looked closely at every single sample image and they are terrible. Same old issue especially the mushiness. I am beside myself with disbelief that the reviewer has any real experience and knowledge in this field. I am sorry to say this because it's not "nice" but this has to be said.
I always shoot RAW. I actually spent several days perfecting SilkyPix to get results out of RAW that were same as jpg. I developed a process to export TIFF from SP that demosaiced the RAF perfectly then used lightroom for editing. I respectfully disagree with anyone who says its simply an algorithm. the simple fact is pseudo random and excessive green pixels require more interpolation in the demosaic process and the results will always be mushy. Color will also never be as true compared to Bayer. Bayer requires less and more balanced interpolation. It's just a fact. There is no way anyone that knows good image quality can say that any of these images provided in the dpreview of the x100s are good. If they do it's complete denial. And frankly I am concerned that DPReview would rate this camera so high while leaving requiring more "read between the lines" in the conclusion. I have been a dpreview fan since the first days with Phil Askey and could trust the conclusions with my wallet.
I had the X-E1 for a short while. Moved to EOS M. The X-Trans is the issue for this camera. All shots included above, especially the young lady outside look sick. Flat, unsharp, and no detail. I use 5DMIIs for paid work, but for family and vacation shots I would be very upset to come back from long vacation to see all my photos looking anything like those in the examples. Fuji should ditch the X-Trans and refund people their money or send replacement camera with Bayer sensor. The X100 with Bayer sensor was the best. They should have stuck with that. Anyone else, in my opinion, that believes that the images in the test look good for $1k camera is in denial.