To Cane and others who "just don't get it"...as a D800 owner and daily Canon 5d3 user at work...I will be getting a X-T1 asap. Not the right camera for everyone, but the utter inability of people to judge a camera based on its own merits never ceases to amaze me.
marike6: Do the mushy greens and heavy NR come standard? :-)
But seriously, it's all well and good to make another APS-C camera but with DSLR styling, but unless the RAW conversion issues with Lightroom are sorted (which they really aren't as of yet), it's going to be tough for RAW shooters to get excited about this body.
Doing command line RAW processing with dcraw or investing in yet another converter like Capture One is not all that appealing. Nor is shooting 8-bit JPEGs.
Marike6...actually my Xpro1 made me search for alternatives to Lightroom for which I am very grateful...for my D800 as well as my Xpro1. I much prefer my new workflow...Photomechanic + Iridient Developer. IQ is stellar for XP1...and noticeably better for D800 too.
bronxbombers4: Arca-swiss upside down monoballs like p0 and p1 are awesome. Quick spin and flick and they are locked and they have wide tilt range.
Bronxbomber...oh so true. I've owned a Markins, a RRS...then got a p1, easily my favorite of the bunch.
white shadow: The X100s is a reasonably good camera for casual use and perhaps for travel. Some like the " Leica look alike" look because they couldn't afford the real McCoy Leica M. It is a fairly good camera to take casual portraits. That's about it.
A full frame DSLR is still the more versatile camera if one is serious about photography despite its heavier weight. It will deliver the goods expected of a professional photographer or for those who engaged them to shoot.
Similar to a Micro 4/3 camera, it will remain a camera for casual use or for collectors who like the look. For practical casual use, the Ricoh GR may be better. For sheer convenience, the Lumix LX7 is surprisingly very useful despite its much smaller sensor especially in low light.
White Shadow, by your definitions of "casual" and "professional"...many of the greatest photographers of all time, past and current, would "merely" be casual shooters. That SHOULD give you pause, to say the least. Stop judging the quality of photographers and photographs by how big their camera is. If you look around, you'll find quite a few FF 35mm digital and medium format digital shooters who LOVE cameras such as the x100s. The camera is capable of making iconic images, are we?
rsf3127: I don't get all the hype about these fuji cameras. The image samples look dull, mushy, without contrast and unsharp when compared to NEX and the 100D either in RAW or JPEG. The ergonomy is ok and the build quality is nice, but this does not compensate for the IQ problem.
The Fuji "hype" for me is...having the IQ of a Nikon D600 (I've now sold mine) in a small, light weight package. Allowing me to get images from subjects I would not get otherwise, due to the intimidation factor, etc of a larger DLSR / lens combo. Also, now I have this IQ potential with me every single day. No way I would carry a D600 kit with me at all times. Fuji makes this a joy.
I understand why dpreview needs to use standardized tests, yet unfortunately, this results in veiling the IQ potential of the x trans sensor. Iridient Developer, C1P7 or the free supplied SilkyPix do not suffer from "mushy" greens and certainly not any lack of detail resolution.
Is the Fuji perfect? Of course not, nor is my D800 or Mamiya RZ67 ProII with a Leaf Aptus 33MP digital back.
My Fuji XP1 (with the incredible 14mm, 23mm soon, 35mm, 60mm lenses) is my favorite photographic tool. Period.
So the consensus is.."meh"? Really? Hmm. A company provides you with access to observe the realtime working process of very successful photographers with decades of experience... for free... and you criticize them ? You'd prefer a pdf with bullet points? Wow.
Charge too much? Again, really? So, for example, you can get a 3 day workshop for $149 ($99 if purchased during the workshop), please share a better alternative. Please share an alternative for TWICE the PRICE. Photoshop World...$600. Is there an option to view it for free? Nope. CreativeLive sounds pretty freaking generous to *me*. Go take Zack Arias One Light workshop, check out the prices! Maybe Moose Peterson's workshops...check the prices !!!
CreativeLive offers you a full week of content that would cost several thousands of dollars via individual workshops with these individuals...FOR FREE...and you question their motivations and substance?
Ungrateful human beings.
J D Tranquil: As an owner of a Fuji X system camera, I would like a fast, constant-aperture, zoom lens in the lineup, 24-70mm f 2.8 to be exact. Or even f1.8 like the Sigma zoom (f18-35), that's even better.
Steven...at 5.6, probably not much difference vs the zoom. And for landscape, the advantages are very likely, very small for you. Me? I will rarely shoot outside of f1.4 - 2.8. Not for the lowlight ability, but for the shallow depth of field.
Best photo news I've heard in a very long time
Photomonkey: This is a good move by Ilford. Swan has a great rack record of quality. However one can also get true B&W processing and printing on real B&W paper at Fromex in Long Beach and possibly a few other places.
Thanks for the B&W resources Photomonkey !
InTheMist: I didn't even know there was a video until I saw the comment below. The position video is actually pretty good.
I would also like more details about what I can actually fit in it, and other benefits. I wonder if it would fit a MacBook Air?
Mist...you might like one of the new TT Mover bags
I think the bag looks pretty good. Turnstyle vs Hubba Hubba Hiney maybe. I know I'm not happy with my LowPro for my Fuji kit.
I sure wish Zeiss would at least tell us what FL's they intend to release with the Uber design. Enough with the vague hints, "landscape" etc. I'm very interested in these lenses. Appears to be significantly narrowing the gap with MFDBs at a fraction of the cost.
Starkiller: A lens without AF is like a car without power steering. It works, but in 2013 nobody will buy it.
Really Yabo? Have you looked at the Sony / Zeiss lens line up? Hmmm...the Touit Zeiss lenses? Yah, more than capable.
pavi1: Who told you medium format was dead? It is expensive, but certainly not dead.
MF dead? Non-sense. marike6 is spot on. It's almost required in some arenas of photography. On a personal note, I'll be shooting some MF film on my RZ67 proII this weekend. Still has a "look" I love. Within a year, I'm sure I'll grab a digital back for it as well.
I'm pretty embedded with Fuji Xpro1, but I'm jealous of the 1/320th sync speed.
Johnsonj: Jpeg rules. RAW is for posers.
Only thing missing is face recognition.
lol ... Revenant !!!
rocklobster: Don't apologize - you are just pandering to the brat mentality of the few.
Great review and great camera. Those ISO 6400 sots are the best I have seen on any APS-C sensor.
jacketpotato...no, it's not...as ryrychung pointed out. Do you think Canon, Nikon, Sony & Pentax are standardized and 100% accurate in their ISO ratings? Certainly not. Fuji has done a superlative job with the X trans & iso performance.
Mikhail Tal: DPR you are giving away gold awards to the majority of cameras now (not counting your "rugged camera" reviews). I'm not saying that the X100s doesn't deserve it but I think you're really diluted the value of a gold award and it's almost like a silver award means its a camera to avoid. You really need to rethink and clearly define your criteria for rating cameras because right now you are sending a lot of mixed messages.
calking....YOU deserve the HALLELUJAH Brother !!
photo perzon: Skin tones with no wrinkles. Fuji has detail without texture, as someone else said.
JackM..."print huge" then it's RAW and Iridient Developer. ID kills ACR/LR..seriously.
mpgxsvcd: Isn't In Camera RAW Noise Reduction a beautiful thing? Oh wait, you can't get that data back if you want it? Ok, never mind.
mpgxsvcd...you're making a mountain out of an anthill. You read somewhere that a tiny bit of noise reduction is present in the "raw" file and *you* conclude it's no longer a true raw file. Utter non-sense. All the more so, since you probably don't own a X Trans cam.
Reading posts like this, is quickly reminding me why I stopped coming to dpreview. Just too much BS to sift through to find even common sense discussions.