Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm announces pricing and availability of the X10 enthusiast compact

By dpreview staff on Oct 7, 2011 at 22:42 GMT

Fujifilm has announced its X10 enthusiast compact will start shipping from November 2011 at a recommended retail price of $599.95. Announced last month,the retro-styled camera features a bright F2.0-2.8, 28-112mm-equivalent lens and is built around the company's 12MP 2/3" (6.6 x 8.8mm) EXR CMOS sensor.

Press Release:

FUJIFILM ANNOUNCES PRICING AND AVAILABILITY FOR THE NEW PREMIUM COMPACT FUJIFILM X10 DIGITAL CAMERA

Valhalla, N.Y., October 7, 2011 – FUJIFILM North America Corporation said today that the all new premium compact FUJIFILM X10 digital camera first announced on September 1, 2011, will have a retail price of $599.95 and will be available in early November.

Building on the tremendous success of the sophisticated FUJIFILM X100 digital camera, the new premium compact FUJIFILM X10 is the latest addition to the growing FUJIFILM X-series of advanced digital cameras.

The FUJIFILM X10 features a new larger 2/3” 12 megapixel EXR CMOS sensor and a bright high-definition FUJINON1 F2.0 wide-angle to F2.8 telephoto 4x manual zoom lens (28-112mm)2  that produces superb image quality from edge to edge. The FUJIFILM X10 has a beautiful blackout and retro design that includes a traditional optical viewfinder with a wide 20° field of view for exceptional image composition. For more information, go to http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/en/.

The FUJIFILM X10 will be on display and available for all to see at the upcoming PhotoPlus Expo at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York City on October 27 through Saturday October 29.

289
I own it
109
I want it
56
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 260
12
JEPH
By JEPH (Oct 8, 2011)

Advertising and Solicitation

For those who don't like soliciting and advertising in the "Comment" section, roll your mouse over the "Like" box and select "Flag."

Just sayin'.....do something about it.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Brett St Pierre
By Brett St Pierre (Oct 8, 2011)

The important things with this compact is the optical viewfinder and the manual zoom, both of which are sadly hard to find anymore yet without them compacts are simply awful to use. I am not just being traditional, these simply work better. At the price I'd be somewhat tempted to get one for a bit of fun.

16 upvotes
Michael Perham
By Michael Perham (Oct 8, 2011)

I wonder how good the optical viewfinder is ...I am spoiled with my X100 and if this execution is not much better than the G12 and its kind, I will stick with the X100. However, I really like the manual zoom idea, maybe in time we will see an X series with this zoom configeration and the OVF of the X100 and an APS sized sensor. Now that would be something!

0 upvotes
JEPH
By JEPH (Oct 8, 2011)

Remember that this viewfinder is only 85%.

I'm sure it's brighter and better than most, but at 85%-well-it depends on the user-it will work for some and definitely not for others.

There's always shooting much to wide and then cropping, I guess.

1 upvote
RoccoGalatioto
By RoccoGalatioto (Oct 8, 2011)

I absolutely agree bout optical viewfinders. Let's hope that this one is accurate.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
1 upvote
foto2021
By foto2021 (Oct 8, 2011)

JEPH wrote "Remember that this viewfinder is only 85%"

True, but what does that 85% actually mean? It means that the *area* covered by the viewfinder image is 85% of the *area* covered by the lens. It does not mean that it covers 85% of the width of the image and 85% of the height.

The correct figure is 92.2% of the width and 92.2% of the height, a crop of 8%. I don't believe that cropping 8% from the width and height of the image is anywhere near as significant as cropping 15%, which is what has been suggested.

1 upvote
Michael Perham
By Michael Perham (Oct 11, 2011)

...and it's not just wether the viewfinder is 85% or 90%. Some compacts have close to that, but it's like looking down a tunnel compared to the big bright viewfinder on viewfinder camera's or even the X100.

0 upvotes
Rob Klein
By Rob Klein (Oct 8, 2011)

I downloaded some of the images and did a bit of work in Photo Shop with them and they were vastly improved. I am a tad disappointed in the low light high ISO images and think that the G12 stuff out of the box looks a lot better and requires less fixing, however, we do not know what the settings were regarding sharpening, noise reduction, etc., in the samples shown from the Polish media briefing. There are, theoretically, many pluses with this camera and so only time will tell if it is a winner. Right now, I too, believe that the price is a bit high when compared to the G12 and I am interested to see what Canon will do now to answer both Fuji and Nikon. The Sony entry is interesting but too expensive and not exactly a pocket camera.

4 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

But we do know what the settings were because it says so right there first thing on top of the samples page. Typos included.

"All images are JPEG files stright from the camera. The lowest level of sharepening and lowest level of noise reduction was chosen."

Even RAW normally has sharpening on '25' by default and if you'd turn it off it would look like this with a s95 too, but with a lot more noise without the noise reduction at all ISOs. Not to mention the depth of field with these apertures and a larger sensor.

Speaking of apertures, the idiot that shot these samples has shot nearly every one of these photos wide open, even when there was plenty more 'shutter speed' to lose most of the time.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 10, 2011)

"the idiot that shot these samples"

I believe the idiot should be given the benefit of the doubt, and there were specific things they were trying to show, and have. Perhaps a little slower on the insult trigger?

0 upvotes
Caplin
By Caplin (Oct 8, 2011)

For me at the moment the most important thing is picture quality, not the camera specifications. For me the best picture quality at this moment have these camera models: Sigma SD1, Samsung NX200 i Nikon J1 and V

0 upvotes
Erik Neu
By Erik Neu (Oct 8, 2011)

You forgot the Ricoh GXR/A12 50mm, Panasonic G-3 and the Sony Nex-7.

Erik
Vietnam

0 upvotes
Gediminas 8
By Gediminas 8 (Oct 8, 2011)

You must be really lucky if you know the picture quality of as yet unavailable cameras.

13 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Oct 8, 2011)

It has fashionable retro styling, so it *must* be an excellent camera. (grin)

1 upvote
zxaar
By zxaar (Oct 8, 2011)

It is roughly 60000 yen in Japan. From 600$ to yen today is 46000Yen. So we would have to pay extra 14000 just for living in Japan. Too bad.

0 upvotes
Erik Neu
By Erik Neu (Oct 8, 2011)

I call it low profile, the camera has no steal-appeal.
Perfect, could be a grandpa camera from the sixties.

Erik
Vietnam

1 upvote
cactusgeorge
By cactusgeorge (Oct 8, 2011)

Low profile: Clueless...

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

It has quite a tall profile because that OVF takes up a lot of space =P

0 upvotes
Erik Neu
By Erik Neu (Oct 8, 2011)

The macro shots have shallow DOF, as everybody would expect. The pictures are not a good choice for showing the real world performance of the optics of this camera.
I hope somebody uploads a landscape, portait and some indoor low light pictures.
Some people on the street with the lens wide open would be nice too.

Erik
Vietnam

2 upvotes
Incessant Troll
By Incessant Troll (Oct 8, 2011)

im surprised you didn't advertise for your project in your post. the constant linking to your work is irritating and i specifically wont be looking at it for this reason.

14 upvotes
ThomasX
By ThomasX (Oct 8, 2011)

"...you have to repeat...otherwise you get lost..."

Come on, this is not a place to advertise for anything! Imagine all posters would do that-what informational value would remain with this forum!?

I second the previus poster, this is annoying and I will not look at this either, to not support annoyances like that.

6 upvotes
cactusgeorge
By cactusgeorge (Oct 8, 2011)

Thomas has got it right, Erik. You might want to listen to what people are trying to tell you.

0 upvotes
Erik Neu
By Erik Neu (Oct 8, 2011)

The main thing about photography is having fun and to let other people enjoy your pictures or to make them think about your photographic subjects.

My posted comments have an ''informational value'' compared to many other posts you can find on the forum and are only followed by a harmless link.

If seeing or reading of a harmless link about somebodies project offends you, then you should....

Photography comes from the heart,
I still have one.

Erik
Vietnam

0 upvotes
ThomasX
By ThomasX (Oct 8, 2011)

Your posts with the link have no informational value.
They simply are advertisements for your website, to generate traffic.
This is inappropriate, and a misuse of this forum. A pity that you don't get it.
(no further comment from my side now)

3 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

Well, you learn neu things every day.

1 upvote
Robert Hoffman
By Robert Hoffman (Oct 8, 2011)

Image quality does not match the hype - not even close. At 100%, my wife's $179 100 HS has better sharpness, much lower noise, and way better color.

These samples look like they were shot with a lens covered with Vaseline.

0 upvotes
charliedid
By charliedid (Oct 8, 2011)

Funny

0 upvotes
Robgo2
By Robgo2 (Oct 8, 2011)

How do people make such statements without performing head to head comparisons of two cameras shooting the exact same scene with comparable settings? The fact that your wife's 100HS is capable of taking sharp photos tells us nothing about how it will compare with a production version of the X10.

Rob

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Robert Hoffman
By Robert Hoffman (Oct 8, 2011)

Hi Rob, from Rob. My comments are based solely on the samples referenced in this thread. I've been in this game a long time(40 years film, and nine years digital) - I know what looks good and what doesn't. There are others, here, who agree with my criticisms.

I fully expect the production images to be far better. If they aren't, then Fuji has a problem.

Rob

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

It's the photographer at fault here, turning sharpening off (jpg needs at least some, with compacts) and shooting nearly everything wide-open whether it needs to or not. Add to that the pre-production quirks.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 9, 2011)

Most consumer P&S have the default sharpening turned way up. Cameras with larger sensors like the X10, m43, and DSLRs mostly have more subtle (read lower) default sharpening, and produce shallower DOF. A P&S image will often look sharper, because everything is in focus. That said, the way the "snap-shots" from Lenstip look are not an definitive word on the X10's IQ. Some of the images look great. I think this cameras gonna be very good, probably excellent. Nowhere near the X100, of course, but a mini version.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Oct 9, 2011)

Another pathetic claim lol. Wake-up dreamer! Your 100 HS camera is a piece of junk and will not gonna match X10.

1 upvote
Robert Hoffman
By Robert Hoffman (Oct 10, 2011)

Even with the 100HS sharpness and contrast dialed down to their lowest setting, the image quality still looks better than the X10 samples, which is saying a lot, considering the big difference in sensor size.

0 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (Oct 8, 2011)

It's going to have to be REALLY good to justify that price

0 upvotes
chyll2
By chyll2 (Oct 8, 2011)

if it is expensive for you, then it is not for you.

I would even say the same for other high end compacts like Oly XZ-1 and Canon G12, but then again, compactness of the product does not matter to me.

1 upvote
Stilian
By Stilian (Oct 8, 2011)

When yesterday I saw the offer for Finepix JX200 under 80$ http://forconsumers.blogspot.com/2011/10/fujifilm-finepix-jx200.html I just couldn't believe it. As far as I know it is a decent camera, isn't it? Is there any problem with it or what, because this prize is just unreal for a 12-megapixel Fujifilm camera.

1 upvote
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Oct 8, 2011)

I would say let's wait for a few decent reviews and user produced samples before judging too hard on the image quality. The JPEG engine may still be tuned.

Right now it is just a cute little camera with interesting specs.

For now let's just hope that $600 does not mean ₤600 or 600€ ...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Peter Evans
By Peter Evans (Oct 8, 2011)

It means £529.00
see http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-fuji-finepix-x10-black-digital-camera/p1527165

0 upvotes
Erik Neu
By Erik Neu (Oct 8, 2011)

Amazon Germany
529.00 Euro

http://www.amazon.de/Fujifilm-X10-Digitalkamera-Megapixel-optischer/dp/B005JRGWNS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1318062047&sr=8-1

0 upvotes
AvanGarde
By AvanGarde (Oct 8, 2011)

This camera looks great on paper but sharpness of photos even in low ISO/ f 4-5.6 is disappointing.I expected razor sharpness with these lens, its 2.0-2.8 .Battery is very weak only 270 shots vs 400 shots from LX.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Oct 8, 2011)

I must say, samples do doesn't look good.

0 upvotes
Caplin
By Caplin (Oct 8, 2011)

I saw the photos of Fujfilmi X10, and i can say that i'm very dissapointet of the sharpness of the photos while looking at 100% size.

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Oct 8, 2011)

use RAW.

0 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Oct 8, 2011)

No thanks. The noise levels look pretty bad already.

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Oct 8, 2011)

give me links for pictures with final firmware, please

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Oct 8, 2011)

http://www.lenstip.com/1949-news-Fujifilm_X10_-_sample_images.html

All images are JPEG files stright from the camera. The lowest level of sharepening and lowest level of noise reduction was chosen.

Not bad for such apertures and ISO. DSLR JPEGs could be not better.

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (Oct 8, 2011)

I wanted to be an X10 fanboy very much, but those samples are terrible! The Canon S100 looks better!

0 upvotes
Robgo2
By Robgo2 (Oct 8, 2011)

Does the S100 have an eye level viewfinder? No? End of story for me.

Rob

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Oct 8, 2011)

G12 for you then. X10 is a turd if those images are real.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 8, 2011)

I don't think you've even looked at them if that is your conclusion.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Oct 9, 2011)

I have. If you have too I don't think you've ever seen good IQ. I really wanted to love this camera. Oh well.

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Oct 8, 2011)

good price. good specs. good move. i like it more than V1.

1 upvote
Klarno
By Klarno (Oct 8, 2011)

I like it. If I was in the market for a compact, it would be at this point tough to choose between this and the Olympus XZ-1.

The difference in sensor size between the 2/3" of the Fuji and the 1/1.63" of the Olympus is marginal. Just an 11% difference. Nothing to get worked up about.

Equalizing the features, the price difference might actually favor the Fuji with the built-in OVF, over the XZ-1 with an additional $180 expenditure on the Olympus VF-3. But that only counts only if you would have bought the VF-3.

The retro looks of the camera, the more diverse range of physical controls, and the EXR sensor might push me in favor of the Fuji.

2 upvotes
glaebhoerl
By glaebhoerl (Oct 10, 2011)

Yeah... I was thinking "oh crap, I should've waited another couple of months and got this instead of the XZ-1, it's exactly what I wanted: slightly larger size in exchange for a larger sensor" (plus nicer looks, hopefully better handling, control over NR, OVF, optical stabilization, EXR, ...).

But then I realize that 2/3", despite sounding much larger, is actually equal to 1/1.5", which is barely larger than the XZ-1's 1/1.63", and I go back to being satisfied that I got the XZ-1 and have been shooting with it for the past two months rather than waiting-and-hoping.

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Oct 8, 2011)

Sample images here:

http://www.lenstip.com/1949-news-Fujifilm_X10_-_sample_images.html

Looks about what you could get with any cheap P&S.

1 upvote
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Oct 8, 2011)

It all depends how competent is the shooter behind the camera.

0 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Oct 8, 2011)

The samples have absolutely nothing to do with the shooter. They are soft, highlights are blown out, colours are pale and there is a high level of noise. I do not see how the shooter could do anything about that. It is mutton dressed up as lamb. Avoid.

1 upvote
limuhob
By limuhob (Oct 8, 2011)

One note. For these shots the lowest level of sharepening and lowest level of noise reduction was chosen.

1 upvote
Maxim Ge
By Maxim Ge (Oct 8, 2011)

Note that all portraits shot with ISO 400-800.

E.g.
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/X10/fujX10_fot08.jpg

has strange parameters 21.9 mm, f/2.8, exp. 1/800 sek., ISO 400.

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 9, 2011)

"I do not see how the shooter could do anything about that"

S90-95 overexposes outside, if you don't compensate, highlights are blown and shot is overexposed. XZ-1 overexposes outside, if you don't compensate, highlights are blown and shot is overexposed. etc. If the shooter does not correct, the shots will be subpar.

Shooter is shooting JPEG, with lowest level of sharpening and lowest level of noise reduction. Hence, softer images, and more noise. And they are JPEGs ... you want the best image quality, shoot RAW. Shooters choice again.

Shooter choosing high ISO to exhibit high ISO performance. Shooters choice again. You did notice that most of the shots are ISO400+, yes?

Colors are pale? Choose a vivid setting if you want "punchier" colors. Shooters choice again.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 9, 2011)

"Looks about what you could get with any cheap P&S."

I love these blanket statements. They aren't perfect, but there's enough in territory that "cheap P&S" cameras can't touch to show that the final results from this camera will likely be more impressive than "cheap P&S". Clean ISO1600 JPEGs (with no sharpening and lowest noise reduction)? Detailed ISO800 indoor portraits (at least for JPEG with no sharpening and lowest noise reduction)?

This is the lowest level quality that this camera will produce, once you take it to RAW the results will be much improved. Plus, the JPEG settings will be tweak able to get *much* better results that shown here - which have the settings they have for good reason.

0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Oct 9, 2011)

I bet your cheap camera won't even come close to any of those shots. Wake up dreamer!

0 upvotes
Pentax_Prime
By Pentax_Prime (Oct 8, 2011)

If you know Fuji compacts - you know this is the spiritual 'sucessor' to the F10/F11/F30/F31 that were extremely popular (and still are) - for their excellent IQ and high ISO for compacts. Looks like a good camera for those still wanting a compact; after owning an F10 and F30; I realized I wanted even better IQ and moved onto a DSLR.

0 upvotes
fransams
By fransams (Oct 8, 2011)

I think I like the fast lens and its zoom-range.
Fortunately I even don't have to search for a body to attach it to.
The body is part of the package!
Great deal.

By the way, what is the price for a similar (2.0-2.8) zoom-lens for M4/3?

0 upvotes
Klarno
By Klarno (Oct 8, 2011)

There is no f/2.0-2.8 lens for m4/3 so far, but the kit lenses that come with all the m4/3 cameras should get pretty similar depth of field at equivalent apertures.

2/3" has approximately a 2x crop factor relative to a 4/3 sensor. A lens that gives similar overall results on m4/3 would be a 14-56 f/4.0-5.6. Any of the 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 lenses should fit the bill, though they don't have quite as much reach. Or you could use one of the superzooms, the 14-150 or 14-140

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

Can't wait for the new micro four thirds 12-35mm and 35-something X lenses from panasonic. Said to be a constant F2, or F2.8 at least !

0 upvotes
Brian Mosley
By Brian Mosley (Oct 8, 2011)

What's that in £ in the UK?

0 upvotes
MisterBG
By MisterBG (Oct 8, 2011)

You should know by now that the UK exchange rate is normally $1 = £1.

0 upvotes
David Clarke29
By David Clarke29 (Oct 8, 2011)

At the moment 1£ sterling = 1$.55 US.

MrBG things are bad enough without you gobbing off with false currency rates.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

He knows, the problem is that the shops pretend not to. Plus taxes.

0 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Oct 8, 2011)

Cmon guys, stop moaning about. I think the price is spot on.
Sometimes looks like any price would be too high for most of you. This camera looks quality, so why it should be in the same pricing with LX5? Don't be ridiculous. Thanks

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Michael S.
By Michael S. (Oct 8, 2011)

Puh...price $100,-- to high.

Would be much higher demand with price-tag under $500,--.

0 upvotes
jcmarfilph
By jcmarfilph (Oct 8, 2011)

Price is just about right. This is better than any current premium compacts and those were even priced about the same or higher than this.

0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Oct 8, 2011)

I would prefer this over G12. Very fast lens!

2 upvotes
Abid Ali
By Abid Ali (Oct 8, 2011)

How many auto focus points does the camera has? Should be 49 auto focus points same as X100? The camera looks great as the sensor size is little bigger as compared to Canon G12 or Nikon P7100. Plus macro focus is 1cm same as G12 or P7100. The optical zoom is 4X which is just ok but i like the style of optical zooming.

0 upvotes
SW Anderson
By SW Anderson (Oct 8, 2011)

Looks to be a very nice camera, provided IQ is really good. I can't help but think the price is overly ambitious, especially in this economy. Even considering the actual selling price will be somewhat lower, it's high. For that kind of money many will go with a DSLR or ILC, whether or not they intend to buy additional lenses.

0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Oct 8, 2011)

DSLR users wont buy another DLSR or an ILC to put in their pocket. But they will buy stuff like this. Price isn't much of an issue here, I believe any photographer who has invested in a DSLR system will agree $600 isn't much.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Robgo2
By Robgo2 (Oct 8, 2011)

Exactly. Cameras like the X10 are supplements to larger sensor SLRs and mirrorless cameras. They do not replace them and are not intended to. Fuji, themselves, are going to produce an ILC mirrorless camera, probably based on the X100. It will be in a wholly different category than the X10.

Rob

0 upvotes
Armen66
By Armen66 (Oct 8, 2011)

Currently the Japanese Yen is valued high compared to the $USD. I think this is one of the reasons for the high intro price of the X10. It is made in Japan isn't it? I'm curious about some of the other cameras that it's being compared to, Micro 4/3rds etc. Anyone have any info on the country of manufacture for some of the completion? I'm not saying there are not good or better cameras out there. But I do believe the being made in Japan gives it a quality edge. I think the optics on this camera will be outstanding, however I agree that the sensor is a bit of a question mark.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Oct 8, 2011)

Doesn't matter where it is made, if the HQ is in Japan, they still have to convert dollars back to Yen to get paid.

0 upvotes
Armen66
By Armen66 (Oct 8, 2011)

Manufacturing costs are higher in Japan than in China. This is due to labor cost and currency value.

0 upvotes
wutsurstyle
By wutsurstyle (Oct 8, 2011)

is it the controls? i don't know what makes this $600 thing an enthusiast camera. It seems more like a compact bridge camera with its fixed lens. Remember, the lens contracts and extends just like P&S cams for better portability.

0 upvotes
drakkar
By drakkar (Oct 8, 2011)

Well, Fujifilm make its own revolution inside the tiny sensor market, with unique models over the X100 good reputation.
This sensor its bigger than Canon G1x, and the body camera have a classical beauty with real OVF, and manual zoom.
Fujifilm makes this own market niche.
The price its always the same discussion. New product, high price, then low in few months.
But its nice to see that Fuji makes more "real" classic cameras designs.
Bravo Fuji!

1 upvote
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Oct 8, 2011)

What is this super expensive small sensor camera day?

First the JVC now this.

$600? It'd be worth it if the IQ was amazing but Fuji's small sensor track record has been abysmal for the past few years and the initial X10 samples are simply not $600 amazing.

ISO 400 daytime:

http://pliki.optyczne.pl/X10/fujX10_fot36.jpg

More samples at lens tip dot com

1 upvote
drakkar
By drakkar (Oct 8, 2011)

Hey man! This is a very nice shot! What do you mean???
another hand, do you have her phone number? Or her e-mail?
;)

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Oct 8, 2011)

> What do you mean???

I mean it's an OK picture but not $600 OK and certainly does not wow me as a sample of the stellar performance of the "unique" Fuji sensor.

To me the picture looks no better than samples from the G12/S95/LX5 at ISO 400 outside in the daytime.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Oct 8, 2011)

>I mean it's an OK picture but not $600 OK and certainly does not wow me as a sample of the stellar performance of the "unique" Fuji sensor.

To me the picture looks no better than samples from the G12/S95/LX5 at ISO 400 outside in the daytime.

Because it isnt using the EXR lowlight mode

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Oct 8, 2011)

600 USD? Not bad price. Not bad photo.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Oct 8, 2011)

Sharpening is on lowest or 'off', but even raw normally has sharpening on '25' by default and if you turn it off it looks like this with a s95 too, but has a lot more noise without noise reduction, which also has been turned off in these samples by the way.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 9, 2011)

"I mean it's an OK picture but not $600 OK and certainly does not wow me as a sample of the stellar performance of the "unique" Fuji sensor."

For what it is, and for what it shows the potential to be, I think it's more than OK. The detail that is there in an ISO400 JPEG (yes outside in daylight), with no sharpening, straight from the camera (stitching in her boots, textures, hair, etc). That to me points to the RAWs being stellar, if they've done it right.

If the highlights have some extra room for recovery, and the shadows retain decent detail, the results should be solid. At least on a par with XZ-1, LX5, etc.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
policeman0077
By policeman0077 (Oct 8, 2011)

considering its volume and small sensor the price tag is a little high

2 upvotes
roblarosa
By roblarosa (Oct 8, 2011)

And just like the Nikon J1/V1 it's about $200 too much. Enjoy it, suckers - oops, I mean, early adopters.

1 upvote
love_them_all
By love_them_all (Oct 8, 2011)

Good price point on the X10. That's actually cheaper than I thought it would be.

0 upvotes
digby dart
By digby dart (Oct 8, 2011)

Fast quality glass with a beautiful camera thrown in for $600, that's the Fuji promise - if the sensor delivers this will be a very exciting enthusiast camera. In the 6mp modes this little baby has the potential to fly.

0 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Oct 8, 2011)

When you think of a classy idea of camera and wrap it up on a small sensor like that and ask for such a sum, it's seems to me like you're ruining something. It's like it has a foot on the mediocre side, it doesn't matter how good it can be in all other aspects. After the Nikon CX sensor size announcement then, I think that even much.

Canon Gs and Panasonic LXs was saved because they came in a time we were still exploring the capabilities of the very small sensors, but now things are changing again. Anything Nikon launches with the likes of these Fujifilm Xs, Canon Gs, or superzooms, with the CX sensor, are going to promise more and get better value overall.

1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (Oct 8, 2011)

this would have been more intesting as a 5mp camera

2 upvotes
Photato
By Photato (Oct 8, 2011)

Totally.
5MP would have been faster, deeper for Raw burst and better in low light.

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (Oct 8, 2011)

Get real. It takes 8mp to print an 8x10 at 300ppi.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
SHood
By SHood (Oct 8, 2011)

You don't need 300dpi for printing. The X10 does have the EXR sensor (non-bayer) which provides a hardware based 6mp for both JPEG and RAW. You have the choice of better DR or noise in this mode. Many people only shoot these EXR sensor in this 6mp mode for these advantages. The DR 6mp mode is very good for reducing highlight clipping, comparable to much larger sensors.

6 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Oct 8, 2011)

SHood, finally theres someone who understands EXR!

0 upvotes
sensibill
By sensibill (Oct 8, 2011)

More expensive than MILC with a compact sensor and fixed MANUAL zoom lens? I hope that styling equates to resale value...

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Oct 8, 2011)

Better lens than any MILC and it will fit in a large pocket. Only $100 more than a Canon G12.

2 upvotes
aljudy
By aljudy (Oct 7, 2011)

Somehow this is becoming a little insane. A fixed lens camera for $600 is a bargain! I must be in some other universe of camera owners... Al

5 upvotes
harrisoncac
By harrisoncac (Oct 8, 2011)

Given the Olympus E-PL3 comes at CAD599.99 at retailer of Blacks Photography, I don't intend to pay 600 dollars for a fixed lens camera. And I have the choice of lot of lens choices to play with. The Panasonic G2 body is only at USD300.00.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 8, 2011)

Many people, DSLR owners, for example, don't want to buy multiple system cameras. Maintaining more than one ILC gets expensive fast. Some photographers just want something small, with good IQ to carry everywhere. A camera like an X10 or XZ-1, with a short zoom, fills that need perfectly. It's not always about price or sensor size.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Oct 7, 2011)

$600 for the early adopters who preorder.....around $529 for everyone else once the pipeline gets filled.

This really isn't a bad price if it delivers better image quality than those $400-$500 high end compacts based on a smaller sensor. And, theoretically, it should deliver better IQ.

1 upvote
D200_4me
By D200_4me (Oct 7, 2011)

I think something like this could end up being my LX5 replacement...whenever I need to replace it. Not for quite awhile.

0 upvotes
rockjon
By rockjon (Oct 8, 2011)

The price will most likely be less when it comes time for you to replace it.

0 upvotes
Denis of Whidbey Island
By Denis of Whidbey Island (Oct 7, 2011)

$600 seems reasonable compared to what I paid for a G10 several years ago, assuming there is no surprise letdown in IQ or performance.

I'll probably pop for one, and I've been looking at NEX cameras and the X100. For me this seems a great combination of portability, likely IQ and price. I might not leave my D700 at home to travel light, but this is the camera to carry at all times, knowing that in many situations I can get a money shot.

Denis

0 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Oct 7, 2011)

It promises to be "idiosyncratic" and "deeply frustrating", just like a genuine X100! (grin)

0 upvotes
Andrew Higgins
By Andrew Higgins (Oct 7, 2011)

Eagerly awaiting the Dpreview review...!

1 upvote
vshin
By vshin (Oct 7, 2011)

It's funny how a 2/3" sensor for $600 is "reasonable" but a smaller camera with a 1" sensor and interchangeable lens for $650 is highway robbery.

11 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Oct 7, 2011)

The problem with the Nikon 1 is not the sensor but the whole package. The x10 with it's fast lens will do much better in low light than the Nikon 1 & kit for $650. The x10 has actual controls and a DR mode that will provide less highlight clipping than the Nikon 1 (based on previouse EXR implementations).

The X10 will feel smaller than the Nikon 1 even thought it is slightly wider and taller due to more controls and viewfinder. The reason is that the nikon 1 with kit lens is almost 1" deeper than the x10.

7 upvotes
dkojevnikov
By dkojevnikov (Oct 7, 2011)

We will talk when Nikon releases f2-f2.8 lens for its camera. Until then X10 wins.

9 upvotes
MirceaR
By MirceaR (Oct 8, 2011)

X10 seems aimed at enthusiast and DSLR users alike.
Almost no DSLR user - I am one - will want to dive into yet another camera (Nikon 1) system, even if it's from the same manufacturer.

1 upvote
Swingline
By Swingline (Oct 8, 2011)

Nikon 1 doesn't have a standard hotshoe. Even the Pentax Q has a hot-shoe.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Oct 8, 2011)

Nikon has already released the 10 2.8 wide for the Nikon 1. And it looks to be a good performer. As an X100 owner, I'm sure I'll like this X10, but lets bet fair. A fixed lens to an ILC it not really a good comparison.

2 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Oct 8, 2011)

The Nikon 1 has a hotshoe for a Nikon 1 flash.

0 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Oct 8, 2011)

For a lot of us the Nikon 1 bodies are a non-starter due to lack of manual controls. What good's a camera if you can't use it? This is certainly a niche camera, but if they didn't see a market for it, they wouldn't release it.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
love_them_all
By love_them_all (Oct 8, 2011)

What camera are you talking about?

0 upvotes
kona_moon
By kona_moon (Oct 7, 2011)

$600 sounds very reasonable.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Oct 7, 2011)

Sounds interesting, would like to see how it does at base ISO (DR/noise) and up to ISO800. Coul be a nice option, lens is very nice, would have preferred a 24mm wide end, but speed is quite good already.

1 upvote
David Lara
By David Lara (Oct 7, 2011)

Dear lord in heaven!

0 upvotes
Elaka Farmor
By Elaka Farmor (Oct 7, 2011)

wow

0 upvotes
zakaria
By zakaria (Oct 7, 2011)

would like to be under 500$ but 600$ is reasonable also I will buy one in that price.

0 upvotes
cxsparc
By cxsparc (Oct 8, 2011)

So Fuji has copied the specs of the Olympus XZ1, put in a marginally bigger sensor with 12 instead of 10 Mpx, slightly slower lens, identical zoom range, retro design and put an optical viewfinder in it.
Chargng 600 Euros instead of 400 may equal the EVF of the Oly, but as far as I know, a simple optical viewfinder has no indication of sharpness, exposure, zoom position, whereas the EVF has.
I guess it depends on the IQ of the OOC JPGs and whether you have to have retro camera.

0 upvotes
Oelph
By Oelph (Oct 8, 2011)

And if the XZ-1 could do decent video it would be a great camera.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 260
12