Whilst it might not be the most impressive camera to review it is a very impressive camera to own. It just does what it does very well and seems a very capable little machine. The excellent sound quality is also an unexpected extra. It makes a change to have a camera where they put the bad bits right but resisted the urge to fiddle with the bits that worked.
SeeRoy: "The P7100's optical viewfinder coverage is roughly 80%."80% - Roughly.Ie A completely useless peep-hole - roughly speaking.
It is very useful at full 200mm zoom. In fact as you get to these sort of long focal lengths it is the rear display that becomes useless in any camera.
photo perzon: So is this better than the Fui X10?
Well the review says you can use the X10 at low ISO because of its fast lenses. Obviously no-one has told DPR that the X10 cannot cope with any shiny objects at low ISO's.
skyfotos: No used x10's on Ebay! Why?
Because eBay sellers are very concerned about their rating. I would never sell a defective item such as any X10 because in the long term it could prove very costly.
One thing that is clear to me is that nothing does as much justice to paper clips as the Olympus XZ-1. The Olly is still the undisputed paper clip imaging champion.
sdyue: i'm here to only share relevant info for shooters like myself who happen to be already dSLR owners, be it FF, or APS-H, or APS-C, who have held off for quite along time with great reservations on a suitable 'prosumer' compact to complement the dSLR, and that it must have a level of IQ and sufficient focal length choices for daily walk-around 24/7 carry around digicam, and not 'another' full ILC system, which do not perform anywhere near what can already be had with our FF/APS-H/APS-C dSLRs.
or even PowerShot G shooters looking for an update 'G' but with vastly improved IQ of a dSLR.
i do it with keen interest on how the G1X compares to what we already own, so that upon scrutiny, the IQ would not be at a level that we'd be ashamed of being handicapped with, that many smaller systems face, or 'in between' or current mirrorless systems. and YES, good performance in LOW light at HIGH ISO's do matter, as we have already taken it for granted with our current larger sensored dSLRs.
You have to admire Sdyue's messages to her beloved subjects as you do not often see someone so in awe of themselves. Even the royal 'we' is used.
pacogwapo: Probably 70% of this mirrorless sales came from iphone and other android smartphones:)
I never realised that these phones had interchangeable lenses! How exacltly do you change the lens on them?
rusticus: I wonder about item 4
The problem is not only in EXR Auto modeFuji has been sleeping?
It is probably a limited tactical admission but designed at the same time to obfuscate the problem. The engineer's software release notes would have been heavily censored by Fuji's lawyers. It is all designed to keep people confused and guessing.
These sort of problems seem almost inevitable given the complexity of the sensor system. The EXR system is looking like a solution for a past problem and is effectively a low light panic mode which turns your camera into a cell phone. I think the real solution is for Fuji to drop EXR. It is interesting when you read the Fuji forum how the non EXR S100fs seems to be the camera to shine through. I hope that Fuji will drop EXR and that it makes lives a lot less stressful for everyone or at least give it as an option. Hopefully their X-Trans will be a success and rolled out instead of the EXR. You have to give Fuji points for trying.
The problem with these silly mega pixel cameras is that they are less capable in automatic mode than the supposedly more manual larger sensor cameras. In bright light the full auto is incapapable of judging the exposure as it has the impossible decision whether to blow the highlights or hide the shadows. In P mode I found you have to invaraibly drop the EVF 2/3 of a stop to get a useable picture. The sensor size is not the problem it is the bizzarely high sensor resolution which will just be smeared out by the JPEG engine. It is a pity that camera manufacturers can quote resolution purely on a single hardware component when the image quality is of course nowhere near the stated number. It is massively cynical and dishonest marketing by these manufacturers. Canon are really to be commended for admitting these pixel densities are of no advantage.
It is disappointing that Olympus still persist in putting such a fine lens in front of such a poor imaging engine.
Is it pocketable?
chadley_chad: Stick a J1 sized sensor in and you'd sell millions - but as it is, its just another high priced, low quality P&S with a long and slow lens. Yeh, it could have a place in your collection, but you'd never take it out on its own (and cry at the results!)
Delicate as well. I dropped my SZ30 1 ft onto concrete and the rear non retracting lens ring bent like tin plate. The whole optical assembly needs replacing at £143 to fix this so it is a write off. Also >12mp on 1/2.3" should be mage illegal.Do not be seduced by the looks. It is a very handy little camera and if it was 12mp could be great but it struggles with the pixel packing.
Alfie Smith: Noob question: Is this a rangefinder or a DSRL?
@JmmgYou cannot say because for example manufacturer Crappy sells a component to manufacturer Top-Notch that the quality of Crappy and Top-Notch's's goods are the same. Top-Notch may reject a large number of the Crappy components. These rejected compnents may even themselves end up in the Crappy products.
Greynerd: They are calling these pro machines but are there extra quality control and support systems promised for these cameras? It does seem to me that Fuji are attempting to be a bulk and a top end producer of cameras at the same time. Has anyone managed this before and do people think Fuji can manage this? My last Fuji had a heavily decentered lens and if you do a Google search over the last year for 'Fuji Decentered' you get 311,000,000 results whereas Canon,Nikon and Sony returns less than 25,000 results each.
Let us not forget there may be hundreds of DISSATISFIED customers you will never hear about. Considering that X10 owners still do not know if the Orb problem is a hardware or firmware problem I would be very worried about commiting £2000 pounds to a company that is so tight lipped when a problem does occur, especially with yet another novel sensor design.
Also I am not saying they do not make good glass just there seems to be a problem at the moment aligning it.
I am afraid cheap and cheerful still omes to my mind with Fuji. They do very good value super-zooms and if people want to risk money on their transition to a high value manufacturer good luck to them.
They are calling these pro machines but are there extra quality control and support systems promised for these cameras? It does seem to me that Fuji are attempting to be a bulk and a top end producer of cameras at the same time. Has anyone managed this before and do people think Fuji can manage this? My last Fuji had a heavily decentered lens and if you do a Google search over the last year for 'Fuji Decentered' you get 311,000,000 results whereas Canon,Nikon and Sony returns less than 25,000 results each.
topstuff: There are a lot of apparently stupid people here. I don't mean to insult, but really, some of the comments are ignorant. If people do not know what they are talking about, its best to say nothing...
The camera is thicker than a NEX ( for example ) for a reason. The Pentax is the ONLY mirrorless that will take all lenses without an adaptor.
Now consider what a NEX looks like with the Adaptor for Alpha lenses attached, or indeed any adaptor needed to extend the miserably short lens range NEX offer. The adaptor needed is HUGE , UGLY and ruins the handling.
The Pentax K 01 needs NO adaptor to take ALL lenses.
This point seems to be entirely missed by the sheep here..
@topstuffThe more you know the more you know how little you know. When someone describes other people as stupid he obviously knows nothing at all.
Sergey Borachev: Imagine someone holding at arms length a DSLR or DSLR-sized camera with a zoom lens mounted and zoomed out :)
You do not have to stretch your arms out to arms length to use these cameras. If you do you are probably extremely long sighted and need a trip to the opticians. Just hold the camera at your minimum focusing distance. Whilst having a viewfinder against your eye gives extra stability it does not really affect the load on your arms. I agree a viewfinder is useful but this formulaic 'arms length' argument is a bit absurd.
I suppose people just do not understand what 'arms length' means.
Is the cost and the complexity of the mirrors starting to hurt in these difficult times. It does make me wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the cheap mirror reflex camera and other manufacturers will follow. As the manufacture of mirror assemblies declines their cost will rise exponentially and the decline will be self sustaining. A lot of people would like viewfinders on their compacts but they had no choice but to lose them.
Simon Zeev: I love the yellow one, but .. NO EVF?
I am sure they will be happy to sell you a big lumpy one to sit on top of the camera. The rule is though that it will cost 50% of the cost of the camera. So to see what you are taking a picture of in bright sun light you will need to multiply the cost of the camera by 1.5. Buying a DSLR would seem to be a cheaper and more elegant solution.
cheong75: come on... do we need 18MP from a compact?
It is a fact that a camera manufacturer can advertise a camera as 18 megapixel purely by putting this chip in it. There is no necessity for the image to show 18 megapixels of resolution and the jpeg engine will use smearing and compression to effectively pixel bin the sensor output. It is interesting how as sensor resolution has increased the super fine compression option has in my experience been dropped (except by Samsung). The people who oversee advertising standards will not understand this so the camera makers will presumably get away with this deception forever.