Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Fujifilm X10 in-depth review

By dpreview staff on Jul 11, 2012 at 23:29 GMT

Just Posted: Our in-depth review of the Fujifilm X10. It's been a long time coming, but we recently got our hands on a modified X10, which incorporates the sensor fix for the much-publicised 'white orbs' blooming issue. Since then, we've been working hard to incorporate our experiences with, and samples from the modified camera into this unavoidably-delayed review. Click here to read our full report on Fujifilm's flagship compact. 

Click here to read our in-depth review of the Fujifilm X10

289
I own it
108
I want it
55
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 155
12
sycostephan
By sycostephan (Jul 23, 2012)

So,
When does dpreview bite the bullet and post a review of the elephant in the room, namely the XS1?

0 upvotes
Shomari
By Shomari (Jul 19, 2012)

Finally. Love the camera though.

0 upvotes
matt k
By matt k (Jul 16, 2012)

Now if only Fuji could make a full frame X10 with excellent auto and manual focusing....and a viewfinder similar to the Xpro.....then they would have something I'd be willing to pay $3000 for.

0 upvotes
danstern
By danstern (Jul 16, 2012)

I agree on the added x20 feature/function. $3k. I dont think so.

1 upvote
Realfi
By Realfi (Jul 17, 2012)

Yes, 3K would be beyond me too! An X20 with the hybrid viewfinder and a few of the little issues ironed even with the same revised sensor would be something I'd gladly more than the current X10 asking price for. I don't think it would be treading on the toes or the other cameras in the FUJI X range either.

0 upvotes
Realfi
By Realfi (Jul 15, 2012)

Well, no doubt when it happens X20 should be a cracker! Oh, btw, I'd gladly pay a fair bit more for the inclusion of the hybrid viewfinder.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Jul 14, 2012)

I have the X10 from November 2011: I think they deserved gold.
She has a magical image quality, the me of my old Leica M3 and M6 recalls - awesome

But silver is not bad ;)

3 upvotes
delastro
By delastro (Jul 13, 2012)

It is now a camera which can be used for years.

And as a little hint if you want to know what is in the horoscope of the fuji x10 you can read it here http://www.astromonat.de - translate it with google ...

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
bydloman
By bydloman (Jul 14, 2012)

Achtung, spitfeuer!

0 upvotes
nspur
By nspur (Jul 13, 2012)

Because it represents exactly what I think about the camera, I found the review very fair! I think it's a 6 mp camera with great jpegs out of the box and no real video capability. It has excellent handling and is satisfying to use. I set it on medium resolution, auto ISO to 3200 and often use it in EXR automatic mode. With the filter adapter I can use a Panasonic 0.75 wide converter that turns it into a 21-84 mm camera that is just right for interiors where the extended dynamic range is very helpful. It was expensive to buy in October 2011 but I've just bought another one direct from Fuji UK for £319.

2 upvotes
pete_mb
By pete_mb (Jul 13, 2012)

From the conclusion: "And even more worse, among the raw converters that do support the EXR sensor, the results are disappointing."

Even more worse?! Good grief dpreview, what kind of English is this?!

4 upvotes
dansclic
By dansclic (Jul 13, 2012)

The review forgot a few things : parallax problems when close viewing, complicated menu handling, expansive ......
I agree with software jpegs. i have sold mine after three weeks, Will probably buy Sony rx100....larger sensor and probably better lens....more pocketable.

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 13, 2012)

The Sony should address your issue with parallax. As for the probably better lens, I hope you're right but I doubt it, having seen the tests at Imaging Resource.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
camcom12
By camcom12 (Jul 14, 2012)

Agreed - RX100 lens is a question mark at the edges.
Viewfinder parallax? Check a XZ-1 or LX5/7 with an EVF.
The X10 jpegs look nice though.

1 upvote
Cipher9250
By Cipher9250 (Jul 13, 2012)

Thank you for the Review I love this camera and enjoy shooting with it I still havent sent it for a sensor change but for almost 1800 shots I did with it only twice ive seen the orbs still I love this camera

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 13, 2012)

If anyone is interested I just uploaded a gallery of X10 "test" images that I edited in Lightroom 4. I can't see any sharpness difference in JPEG and RAW. Obviously the JPEG has slightly more digital sharpening but both type of files look great.

No sharpening of any kind added in LR 4. And I made one image of a reflective surface, a brass doorknob, to show the new sensors much improved rendering of specular highlights. Cheers everybody.

Full size X10 Sharpness Test Images
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5543808958/albums/x10-acr-test#page=1

2 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Jul 13, 2012)

If you uploaded full sized images you have to change your privacy settings because all shots are 2mp

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Hugo Gold
By Hugo Gold (Jul 13, 2012)

try to sharpen the raw files with LR or PS. thats a real disaster

0 upvotes
Eiffel
By Eiffel (Jul 12, 2012)

Thank you for the review. I must say that I was expecting better compared to my Canon Powershot S100 (which only scored 72%) and some of the hype.

- Image quality, Jpeg or Raw is equivalent at best despite the slightly bigger sensor (at low or high ISOs)
- The Fuji is bigger, heavier and lacks many of the features I like (24mm,
GPS, etc.)
- Combining the power switch with the zoom control is, in my view, not such a great idea, as it's not possible to set the camera to a given focal length reliably if one turns it on and off.

Having a viewfinder is a plus, as is the faster lens in telephoto (although a limited version thereof), but the price differential makes it unattractive

Maybe the next version will correct all these issues...

1 upvote
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

The camera can do a quick start up and can be set to power off after a minute. So if you need a certain zoom length for a little while that will solve it.

The X10 is meant to compete against the Canon G12, not the S100, hence the larger size.

In the low light 6 MP mode, the X10 does much better than the S100 since the sensor has adjacent pairs of photosites.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 13, 2012)

The faster lens of the X10 at the long end (f2.8) really sets it apart from the S100. One of the only other P&S cameras to offer this is the XZ-1. The S100 I think is f4.9 at the telephoto end, so DOF will be fairly deep no matter what you do. Using the X10 lens wide open gives excellent DOF control for a P&S and you can actually get nice subject/background separation if you get reasonably close to your subject. There are really few P&Ss that offer so much for photographers/enthusiasts as the X10.

3 upvotes
john Clinch
By john Clinch (Jul 13, 2012)

Current UK prices the X10 is cheaper. Its hard to really rate size isn't it. I mean know one would expect a D800 to be down graded for not being pocket size. You have to choose the size you want, a reviewer can't do it for you

2 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (Jul 12, 2012)

Amadou,

Thanks so much for doing the review. I've been holding off buying one until the orbs issue was fixed and I saw your review confirming it. If you're accepting requests, I'd like to make one...

Could you please add 112mm/2.8 shots to the portrait comparisons on the "8. Image Quality" page of the review?

I want to see how the shallow DoF capabiliity of the X10 compares to what's possible on the DSLR kit zooms.

Thanks again for the review.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Ridethelight
By Ridethelight (Jul 12, 2012)

Found the G1x unuseable,autofocus is terrible,IQ is brilliant but negated by the slower lens compared to the X10,as i now mainly print up to A4 max and view images on my Ipad 3 the X10 images look great for what i need,maybe for more critical stuff you will want a more capable sensor etc,but after 10 yrs of digital i'm sick of PP and computers, the X10 jpegs just work and lets me concentrate on photography !!! some people should try that instead of bitching.

9 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Jul 13, 2012)

You said it, brother. I will be happy when I never have to open Photoshop again.

4 upvotes
409novaman
By 409novaman (Jul 15, 2012)

You got that right!

0 upvotes
John Sargent
By John Sargent (Jul 12, 2012)

Seems odd to me that a camera whose image quality, by your own admission, clearly falls short of excellent should get a silver award. But it looks good, and perhaps that's what counts.

0 upvotes
Ridethelight
By Ridethelight (Jul 12, 2012)

Where did they say that in the review ?? ie the image quality of the X10 clearly falls below excellent.

2 upvotes
Jim Evidon
By Jim Evidon (Jul 12, 2012)

It's a late review because DRP found a serious "orb" issue that Fuji addressed with a new sensor. DPR wasn't late. Fuji was. Unfortunately, by the time Fiji addressed the issue, the new Canon GX-1 bypassed it on performance. Refer to the Raw and JPG comparison results in the DP review of this camera. As for me, I waited for the OM-5 (E-5M) and am now a happy camper.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
markmosk
By markmosk (Jul 12, 2012)

Fellas. You gotta get your homework in on time, no matter how good you do on it. Hoping for a review of the RX-100 before Xmas.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

I'm glad the review noted the grey bar on the screen. I really want to turn that off for composing in 1:1 and 4:3.

Fuji, please fix these issues too with a firmware update:

The Custom display view is unavailable in EXR Auto. Custom is the only view where framing aids like the histogram, grid lines, and electronic level are available. I appreciate the electronic level and miss it from EXR Auto.

Allow 30 second exposures from ISO 100 to 1600. For now 30 second exposures are only available at ISO 100. At ISO 400 it's 8 seconds. At 800 it's 4 seconds and at 1600 it's 2.

ISO Bracketing isn't useful in low light. It takes three shots with identical shutter and aperture. Only the ISO changes between the three so the brightness varies. What would help in low light is lock the aperture and adjust the shutter speed to compensate for the ISO. The three shots will have the same brightness with three opportunities for a sharp, clear photo. Then keep the sharpest one with hopefully low ISO.

0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

More things to improve:

After taking a picture, allow review for longer than 1.5 or 3 seconds by pressing Zoom Out. This removes the need to enter the playback mode and the screen blinking to black for a distracting quarter second.

In review/Playback mode, portrait-oriented photos don't automatically rotate to fill the screen when holding the camera vertically so the image can match the screen. The pictures are displayed small and narrow in the middle of the screen with black vertical bars. Worse, when zooming in the black bars remain. That's right. As it zooms it doesn't use the whole screen, only the middle strip that a 4:3 portrait takes up. So a 16:9 or 3:2 image starts narrower and will zoom in to fill the space of 4:3 but no further. There is a menu setting to playback portrait shots rotated ninety degrees but then they always are like that and require turning the camera vertically for them.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

More things to improve:

When deleting photos the confirmation window has two choices, OK and Cancel. Cancel is the default. Allow users to change the default to OK. Deleting will go 50% faster.

To delete multiple photos, each one must be tediously selected. Add a way to select only the first and last in a range of them such as 0022 through 0086 and then delete the range.

As noted in the X-Pro1 review, pictures taken in Continuous drive mode use are saved with a different filename convention. Please change this or give users the option to change to use the same convention for stills and continuous drive.

Also as noted in the X-Pro1 review, adjusting manual focus takes too long and too much rotating the wheel. Fix this by detecting how fast the wheel is spun and move the focus more quickly or slowly to correspond. That will make taking a macro shot followed by a panorama picture quick and easy.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Webzilla
By Webzilla (Jul 15, 2012)

read the manual

0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 16, 2012)

I did and I stand by every point I listed except the very last one about manual focusing, which I have since been informed about using the AFL/AEL to help focus.

Only a firmware update can solve the issues or add the features I listed.

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Jul 12, 2012)

Over rated score compared to the downrated K-01 , respect to the finals photographic results you can get on both. With the fuji you can´t defeat the Pentax. Clearly DPR it´s not the Bible.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Our scores are category-specific, meant to offer a way to compare cameras of the same class. Because the K-01 is not a compact camera, you can't meaningfully compare its score to the X10.

4 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jul 12, 2012)

Go to the link below (or page 16 of the review) and move the magnifying view box from the coins on the bottle to the paper clips.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x10/16

The Olympus XZ-1 kills the X-10 in contrast, focus and three dimensionality. No contest - not even close!

If the XZ-1 truly deserves the 74% rating dpr gave it, then they were feeling mighty generous towards Fuji.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Jul 12, 2012)

Now check at ISO800 and above.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jul 12, 2012)

If that's the best Fuji can do at a low ISO, there's no point in looking any further. Anyhow, even at ISO 800, jpeg or raw, the XZ-1 retains more detail, it's very obvious in the paper clips. The X-10 looks soft.

2 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

At ISO 800, look at the older woman's hair. The XZ-1 smeared away the detail. Also look at the blond hair in the lower right. The XZ-1 is a smeary glob.

If you're never using your camera to photograph people in lower light conditions, the XZ-1 is better. Unless it's a high contrast scene and you don't want so much highlight clipping or black shadows. Then the X10 is better again thanks to the superior dynamic range.

The XZ-1 has limited circumstances when it has better image quality. It's like a car with lots of power but not so good cornering. The X10 has the cornering and a good amount of power. It's better balanced.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jul 12, 2012)

The XZ-1 is superior at ISO 100, 200 & 400. So clearly the X-10 is the more limited camera here. In fact out of that group test, the X-10 has the worst IQ of the lot!

If you think that the X-10 is better balanced, than you must think FOX News is fair and balanced.

0 upvotes
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Jul 12, 2012)

No question that the XZ-1 looks better in that case, but tough to really make an overall statement about the two cameras based on the edge of the frame at one focal length, distance, and aperture. The Canon G1X looks bad there too :) A lot depends on the lens and distance!

0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

The X10 sensor isn't a traditional bayer pattern. It's been acknowledged the alternative pattern doesn't have the same sharpness. However it's better in low light, high contrast, and high dynamic range scenes.

At ISO 100, look at the Baileys bottle countryside. The X10 almost has as much detail. When resized for a screen or printed, it will look almost as good.

Alternatively for pixel peeping, look at the yellow feather behind the fuchsia and brown feather. The X10 actually captured more detail and texture. The XZ-1 smeared the fine detail.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jul 12, 2012)

"Alternatively for pixel peeping, look at the yellow feather behind the fuchsia and brown feather. The X10 actually captured more detail and texture. The XZ-1 smeared the fine detail."

Not at ISO 100... there the XZ-1 retains more detail, color and contrast.

0 upvotes
Neimo
By Neimo (Jul 12, 2012)

At ISO 100 the XZ-1 doesn't have more detail. Most obviously on the right edge where the feather overlaps with the color boxes. The X10 shows more of the faint lines of the barbules. The XZ-1 shows the lines of the feather tips converging into a mostly solid block of yellow.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jul 12, 2012)

I'd expect more from a $600 camera. For that amount there are better options if IQ matters at all. And that parallax viewfinder with a whopping 85% coverage seems more like a cheap after thought than a serious OVF.

3 upvotes
skytripper
By skytripper (Jul 12, 2012)

Finally!

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 12, 2012)

After all the fuss, what have we learned? Well, stuff that people who actually have an X10 already know. (1) It's not a video camera, (2) The lens is very good, (3) The lens barrel protrudes into the viewfinder which is ok on a Leica M camera but not on the X10, (4) this may be the one camera where Ken Rockwell is right about something--you have to work to make raw look as good as jpeg does right out of the camera. Oh, and I almost forgot; it's really a 6 megapixel camera which sounds like a huge drawback but in practice works fine.

I'm not sure I agree with Fuji's decision to not call out which cameras have the new sensor but since many people never encounter the orbs I can see where they are coming from. I was one of those foolish early adopters so I should have gotten an orb by now.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Jul 12, 2012)

Take it back! There's something wrong with it!

0 upvotes
JohnnyD625
By JohnnyD625 (Jul 12, 2012)

Thank you for the review. I've been holding out on sending the camera in for the sensor replacement and with this review (plus ybizzle's comments) i"ve made up my mind. I'll call them today to set it up.

I've had the camera about 3 months and absolutely love it. Nothing comes close for a point and shoot. Yes, I can put it in my pocket. I used to always shoot RAW because I was never happy with in-camera jpg results unit I got the X10. The poor RAW performance doesnt' faze me because I've been thrilled with the results right out of the camera. Just some minor tweeks is all it needs.

In fact, my Nikon DSLR has been getting lonely since I got the X10...

1 upvote
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (Jul 12, 2012)

To put it mildly ---- 76% rating is a very generous rating for this overpriced digital point and shoot...

Tried it at the store -- can't focus a lick inside the store, terrible jpegs even at low ISO ....... and yes the price tag of $600.00.

One of the worst $600.00 I have seen....

4 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

Another worthless comment that adds nothing to the discussion. Did you know you have to half press the shutter to focus? ;)

11 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 12, 2012)

Shoots wonderfully in RAW.

Also when I tried it in October it had no focus problems indoors and the jpegs out of the camera were pretty good.

So something tells me either you tried a bad example or there were further settings that needed adjustment.

Now that the orbs problem is fixed, and if I didn't own a Panasonic LX5, I'd seriously consider this. This camera is a big deal.

Seems to me that I spent about $700 on my first Canon G2 in late 2001--that's the price for the camera alone, no cards or extra batteries. So $600 for this camera doesn't seem like a huge amount for what you get. (It is a big price compared to some jpeg only camera with a 3.5 lens--but that's not the market.)

0 upvotes
TAGRIFFIN
By TAGRIFFIN (Jul 12, 2012)

Hi. I love my x10. A few quirks - the continuous focus without half pressing the shutter is kinda hard for me to get my head around - but the results are usually very good and it feels and looks well built. And a girl said it was "cute!"!!
Tim

0 upvotes
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (Jul 12, 2012)

ybizzle, why do you feel offended by another person's opinion on this camera ? Are you that narrow minded and not very smart ?

Do you expect everyone to love and admire what you think is good ?

Grow up boy.....you are indeed giving new meaning to 'fanboy' !!

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

I'm not really offended by anything. The only narrow minded person is you who comments on a camera you don't even own. When you can add some substance to the discussion based on a camera you OWN, comment away.

Oh and FYI, look at the comments on this site and reviews around the net that praise this little gem. Yea I'm a fan boy...A fan of quality cameras. ;)

Go play somewhere else...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (Jul 12, 2012)

ybizzle....does not take much to try it on the store to find out this camera can't focus very well.....

spending an hour with this camera is all I need that this camera has issues...

excuse me if my process is quicker than yours...

unlike lots of folks....I will not buy a camera just to try it out....when I purchase one.....will keep it unless defective...

So think first before you criticize me....

0 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (Jul 12, 2012)

Another pointless "I tried it at the store" post.

A few minutes playing around with a camera doesn't give you enough experience to make any kind of reasoned judgment. Apart from anything else, owners have presumably read the manual and have a much better sense of how to actually use the camera.

Thanks to the posters who actually own this camera and can shed some real light on its pros and cons.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Jul 12, 2012)

The point is that subjective comments like "I think it's overrated" are pointless because all you have to do is not buy one and this takes care of the problem.

1 upvote
izhitzza
By izhitzza (Jul 12, 2012)

ybizzle, I don't see you complaining about positive comments written by non-owners. Luckily, you don't decide who can or cannot comment. So please, stick to the point and stop bullying people simply because you have nothing substantial to respond with to a negative comment about a product you own.

0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

chopsteeks did your alter ego account izhitzza come to back you up? ;)

1 upvote
izhitzza
By izhitzza (Jul 13, 2012)

ybizzle, you still have nothing substantial to say about the content of the post? It's ok, don't feel bad :)

0 upvotes
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (Jul 13, 2012)

ybizzle, now you resort to personal insult......grow up little boy. Unlike you, I do not worship these little computers. Get a life ...

jakeb ---- buying the camera will correct the AF issue ? Tell me me how....I seriously would like to know the trick ? Will this also correct the so so performance of its jpeg ?

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Jul 12, 2012)

Looks like a nice camera. But, its not really the form factor that im looking for in a compact, carry everywhere camera. The protruding lens and massive lens hood really kills the portability, might as well carry a mirrorless.. or something slightly bigger but much better like the G1X.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

G1X is $200 more. Mirrorless won't come with a fast lens out of the box so you'll be spending extra on those fast lenses! This is the complete package and a nice compromise between IQ and portability!

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Jul 12, 2012)

Jogger:

You can take the lens hood off, in fact it does not ship with the camera.

That lens hood is really a filter adapter, and filter adapters make these cameras bigger--true of my Panasonic LX5.

Then of course this Fuji, and the LX5 for that matter, both have faster lenses than the bigger Canon.

1 upvote
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

Sent my old X10 to Fuji Canada to have the sensor replaced. They sent me a new X10 instead. No more orbs, just beautiful pictures! The best point and shoot just got better!

2 upvotes
maboule123
By maboule123 (Jul 12, 2012)

They did that for you?
Well it restores my faith on Fuji.
But don't forget how many photographers were left lost in the dark after the one month return policy from the vendor and Fuji.
How about some more testimonials like yours here?

0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (Jul 12, 2012)

In Canada, Fuji has a 2yr warranty so even after the 30 day vendor return policy is over, you can send in your cam to Fuji to have it evaluated. On the form they send you, you can indicate whether or not you want them to fix your cam, or send you a new one based on their discretion. I chose this option and received a new one.

Mind you, I bought my cam right when it came out so it was out putting orbs constantly. I even had dust in the lens but all that has been fixed with this new model!

0 upvotes
Peter Albinger
By Peter Albinger (Jul 12, 2012)

I also got a new camera from Fuji Canada. In fact, I was expecting it. It would seem less trouble than paying a technician to take out the old sensor (and whatever else) and put the new one in.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jul 12, 2012)

Thank you for great reaview. This is how the proper DPR should look like.

I still think, that camera as unique as for example FZ150 deserved the same: proper analysis of noise, DR, lenses.

I have only one small request regarding this review: the 6MP output (at DR100 & DR400) should be added to the studio comparison tool.

The same was done in case of F80exr. For a reason.

1 upvote
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (Jul 12, 2012)

It's got excellent build quality, though...

0 upvotes
edu T
By edu T (Jul 12, 2012)

A correction is due in the EXR-DR part (page 9): "In this mode the sensor starts reading from alternate lines of photosites (ending their exposure), part of the way through the total exposure time. This means half the sensor stops capturing light early."
But as per the mentioned Born’s article and also some tests on the fuji forum, "half the sensor is exposed shorter and LATER."

1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Corrected the text in the review.

0 upvotes
HKR2010
By HKR2010 (Jul 12, 2012)

Just look at the gallery shots, the beauty of each picture says it all about this camera. They are filmlike and unique to my eyes. Go to the new 650D Gallery and compare the shots.

1 upvote
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (Jul 12, 2012)

Yes, IQ from this camera is quite superb. But then again, there are other cameras that matches IQ of X10.

But there are too many quirks for a $600.00 camera as outlined in the conclusion page of the review...

76% rating is quite generous....imho.

1 upvote
HKR2010
By HKR2010 (Jul 12, 2012)

Yes that's true. They should build a new model without the quirks. I think the review was very aqurate and I really liked the pressure that was build up by DPreview on the Sensor/Orb issue.
They deserve great respect for this.

0 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Jul 12, 2012)

This review pulls no punches with regard to determining whether or not a model on the shelf contains the old or new sensor. In that regard alone Fuji's silence is deafening and damning. The other major issue raised in the review is this line from the list of negatives: "Poor image quality of Raw files processed via the bundled (and other third party) software." Of course the "other third party" software in question must include PS. If one is buying this camera as a walk-around model with RAW capabilities and those capabilities are inferior, a rating of 76 is frankly preposterous!!! Thus, while parts of this review are praiseworthy, in the end DPR has done followers a disservice.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Hmmm...the 'disservice' being that anyone considering spending their money on a camera has to read the review to get our take on it rather just just looking at its score on the product page?
Keep in mind that our overall rating is derived from various aspects of camera IQ, performance, operation and features.

4 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (Jul 12, 2012)

No one should take the numbers at face value without reading a review. That said, one of DPR's sorting factors to begin research is the rating number. The jury cannot disregard the reMARK! A camera whose RAW capabilities are critical to potential users and whose RAW capabilities are inferior deserves a lower rating.

3 upvotes
andywhoa
By andywhoa (Jul 12, 2012)

I agree that various pieces of the conclusion should be weighted differently. The X10 should probably have a lower score, and the X-Pro1 should have a much higher score.

0 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jul 12, 2012)

When reading the comments, I keep being amazed by how many people can not grasp simple fact:

X10 can do f2.8 at 112mm, with ISO800 still giving great results with excellent DR.

I think that alone makes X10 surpass RX100 & G1X in terms of usability.

4 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Jul 12, 2012)

Not from any image comparisons in the same conditions I have seen.

And I have shot them side by side.

The G1X has better maximum light sensitivity 12,800 ISO vs 3,200 ISO, 2 f-stops better.

And for noise it's about 1.4 f-stops higher ISO than the X10.

I do know that my X10 cannot do this: http://g1.img-dpreview.com/6F817EBDA2B845F6A75E20A7DD2A16B8.jpg

Or this:
http://g3.img-dpreview.com/01E008CDF5A14735BB199FCABCAF19FA.jpg

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
locke42
By locke42 (Jul 12, 2012)

At the same time, though, the RX100 and G1X have massive sensors, which means they can be used at higher ISOs. Looking at DPR's comparator, the G1X seems to have a two or three stop ISO advantage over the X10. The RX100 probably won't be as dramatic, but it will have probably a 1-stop ISO advantage. Add that to its performance advantages and its pocketability, and you're looking at a very competitive camera for only $50 more.

Don't think that I'm against the X10, though. I've been refreshing this site every hour for the past week waiting for the X10 review. It just seems to be calling my name every time I see it.

However, practicality trumps passion in this case. I already have a DSLR. An RX100 or S100 would be a much better complement for my kit.

2 upvotes
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Jul 12, 2012)

@GaryJP: 1.4 stops higher ISO (at the same noise evel). At the same time 1 stop slower lens. So, you're right, X10 does not surpass G1X. But the advantage of G1X is not that dramatic.

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (Jul 12, 2012)

There is still resolution to spare. "Not dramatic" to you is a deciding factor for some.

2 upvotes
Jusup Sukatendel
By Jusup Sukatendel (Jul 12, 2012)

thank you for this review.
based on the result, the x10 got the highest score in this class.

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Jul 12, 2012)

Better late than never. Thanks for making it clear all along that the issue of orbs was causing the delay of this review. That should be enough warning to those who were considering buying before the review is out.

It is however disappointing that the review was not published earlier so as to give everyone a clearer picture of what this most significant camera (at that time) was like in all its features and IQ other than the orb, and THEN later updated with additional orb fixing information. That would have made it more useful and interesting, since this camera is not so interesting now, months later, after the E-M5, and the RX100, and others.

My interest in this camera and this review have been lost long ago and so I only read the part about the orb issue.

This is still way better than another delay in reviewing another significant camera - DXOMark's E-M5 review. No reason given for the delay and nothing to suggest why it should take extra time or given less priority.

3 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Sergey,
Whenever a move as drastic as a new sensor is involved, there's always the potential for other IQ and even operational changes, accidental or otherwise. While the suggestion to simply publish with hardware we knew would not be what customers (who bought later or sent their original in for replacement) would ultimately be getting may sound reasonable, it would have meant re-doing all of our IQ testing and evaluation and potentially every single image sample in both the review and gallery. We could have found ourselves in a position where we would have had to essentially review the camera twice. That would not have gotten us to this point (a full review of the new sensor) any faster.

So I understand your frustration, but we decided to hold off, and then of course had to re-schedule the review process around other cameras in the pipeline, like the D800, D800E and 5D Mk III, for instance which are of interest to even greater numbers of our readers.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Elaka Farmor
By Elaka Farmor (Jul 12, 2012)

X10 is a special case, the delay was correct if you ask me. But I would ask for little faster Studio scene comparisons sometimes. An example is Canon SX40 HS. Soon one year.

2 upvotes
Sergey Borachev
By Sergey Borachev (Jul 13, 2012)

Thanks, Amadou for your reply and explanation.

I think we all regret what happened, or what caused the delay - the orbs that ruined what was supposed to be the launch of a great camera so eagerly awaited by so many since the X100 was released.

At this time, it is just another fairly good camera, after a few really nice mirrorless have been released, reviewed and without a show-stopping fault, and hence stole the show. Too bad for Fuji. All the momentum originally generated months and months ago was lost. I wish it has learnt its lessons, not just this, but also the over-heating in the HS20, the same orbs in the X-S1, and the launch of the X-Pro1 with no IS lens or zoom, but with significant focusing flaws.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
yudhir
By yudhir (Jul 12, 2012)

DPR! Will there be a37 review??
Anyways Nice review of x10. i liked it

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Jul 12, 2012)

A37 Review-

See A35.

-Carl

3 upvotes
yudhir
By yudhir (Jul 12, 2012)

r u sure..

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Jul 13, 2012)

yup, basically the same camera

maybe its not DPR's fault, maybe Sony ought to stop making 6 zillion models of cameras every year that are so much like one another

0 upvotes
taotoo
By taotoo (Jul 12, 2012)

I think more detail on the viewfinder needs to be included - e.g. a photo through it, and a graphic depicting its size in comparison to other cameras. After all the only reason anybody would buy this camera is because it has one....

3 upvotes
cassano
By cassano (Jul 12, 2012)

Very serious review. Thank you DPR!

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (Jul 12, 2012)

i find this camera very appealing. build quality form factor and user experience are lovely for a cmera this size. the lens is just right and has some of the best depth of field capabilities of any compact camera.

the image quality isnt as good as it should be

0 upvotes
Red Bicycle
By Red Bicycle (Jul 12, 2012)

Thank you DPR - I've had the camera from when it was first released and found the review added to my knowledge.

I would have liked to have seen some comparison shots of Raw processed in camera rather than with an external editor - did I miss this somehere?

Fuji Australia is saying they will replace the sensor if you ahve V1.03 and provide a printed photo showing orbs.

Cheers

Michael

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Don't forget that unless stated otherwise, the JPEGs you see throughout the review pages are processed in-camera (ie they are by default in-camera Raw conversions). We've also included a before/after example of in-camera raw conversions in the review and have a number of images in the samples gallery that were reprocessed with additional settings like film simulation modes.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 12, 2012)

I have zero issues with raw, which is all I shoot with the X10. Lightroom 4 and ACR work perfectly, AFAIK, and I've never seen anything from the images like the raws in the Comparison tool (RAW images from my X10 are as sharp or sharper than my previous XZ1 and GRD III). The jpegs are very good, but raws look terrific. Fuji colors are always excellent, the x10 has a superb lens, and high ISO ability is very strong for such a camera.

All of these are raw processed in Lightroom 4, exported to jpeg

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5543808958/albums/fuji-x10

DPR, thanks for the review. Maybe you can reshoot the raw section, as the current images there do a diservice to a wonderful camera (You can borrow my X10, it has a new sensor, and is good to go). The way the raw comparison is now is really not representative of the output the X10 produces without breaking a sweat.

4 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

marike,
I've only browsed through a couple of images in your X10 gallery, but do you have any full res 12MP raw files processed via LR/ACR? Because if you have third party raw conversions that show more detail than the in-camera JPEGs, we'd love to see them.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 12, 2012)

Amadou, Sure I do. I will post a couple to my DPR Gallery later when I get home. I'll let you know when they are available.

I've shot raw + jpeg, and the raw, in similar fashion to a DSLR, the raw files seemed richer. Put it this way, I've never seen any blurred detail in raw, quite the contrary. But I only ever used LR.

0 upvotes
John_I
By John_I (Jul 12, 2012)

Thanks for the excellent series Marike! I always shoot raw with Nikon using Nikon software but have been so pleased with Fujifilm OOC jpgs I haven't bothered with bundled software. You have inspired me so I will now install an on sale copy of Lightroom 3 that has been sitting around for months unopened. Here are some of the best of my X10 including a trip to Rome when I decided to leave my dSLR home and just enjoy unencumbered portability. I was impressed.

http://jbipix.com/?s=fuji

Amadou. Thanks for being so forthright and helpful ... and out here in the comments section to dialogue with members. Neat!!! As a former internet network coordinator with responsibility for a suite of forums, this is exemplary and brings reasoned and informative exchanges of ideas!

John - http://jbipix.com

0 upvotes
timo
By timo (Jul 12, 2012)

HHmm. At full resolution using LR it is impossible to get RAW files to deliver the same fine detail as in-camera jogs. Very frustrating. In general I have found all full-resolution shots to be a bid disappointing, producing detail hardly distinguishable from the 6mp settings. This is not, currently, a camera for RAW shooters, as the review makes clear.

Incidentally, I could not find the resolution test ... ?

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jul 13, 2012)

@Amadou + everybody
I have posted full-size "test" images, as per Amadou's request. I shot RAW + JPEG and uploaded the files without correction (obviously the raw were saved as JPEG, and saved with _ACR.jpg, as is DPR's custom. Except for slightly higher digital sharpening in the JPEGs the fine detail look the same. I love shooting with the X10, as for a P&S it has good DOF control, and the lens had decent bokeh.

0 upvotes
wootpile
By wootpile (Jul 12, 2012)

I am aware that the X10 is.. sort of "new".. and thank's dpr for doing a review... but, it somehow feels like this is a late review of a product that is already pasé.

1 upvote
Ergo607
By Ergo607 (Jul 12, 2012)

as explanied, dpreview waited until the white orb fix before publishing the review...

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Jul 12, 2012)

Ergo607 is correct. Given the reaction to the white orbs in our forums, once we heard that a sensor replacement was forthcoming we made the decision to delay the review of the camera until we had one with the new sensor.

People can complain that it's late, of course, but it wasn't for lack of effort on the part of any of us at dpreview, particularly, Mr. Kelcey Smith, who, as our studio manager and testing wizard, dealt heroically with a number of technical issues in getting the studio work accomplished.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Jul 12, 2012)

The X10 is probably the most collaborative review we've ever done. We also published a lot of content on this camera prior to the review (knowing that the review was going to take some time), which on many other 'review' sites would cumulatively have counted as a full and complete treatment of the camera... just search for 'Fujifilm X10' in the box at upper right, and you'll see it.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
thincrust88
By thincrust88 (Jul 12, 2012)

I think the biggest "flaw" of the X10 is its very poor battery life (as compared to its mirror-less counterparts). I have read earlier reviews on this, and that it can hardly take over 200 shots in one go...

4 upvotes
Jim in AZ
By Jim in AZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Some of those EXR images are awesome and if you need to reproduce difficult lighting conditions then this is the camera.

2 upvotes
Greg Henry
By Greg Henry (Jul 12, 2012)

It really depends on who they want to sell the camera to, and if it's to "photo enthusiasts", then it's just fine in terms of handling and retro-feel, etc. I do stock work, so the image quality is very sub-par (to me) for that use, as it is from most Fuji cameras to be honest - but again, if you're not submitting images to a company that is going to pixel-peep it, then there's far less worries about the quirks. These are still good enough for reasonable sized enlargements.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jul 12, 2012)

What other compact camera would be better for "stock work"? None, right? It's like saying this isn't the camera to use to shoot track and field at the Olympics.

6 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (Jul 12, 2012)

This is a very good camera, but I feel that an upgrade to a 1 inch or even 4/3 sensor is very necessary now considering the competitions out there.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jul 12, 2012)

At the time, 2/3 was the biggest sensor in a compact, so Fuji did well fitting it in here. Also keep in mind that the Rx100 you are referring to has a measly f4.9 at telephoto, which is almost 2 stops slower than the X10. So you'll actually get a little bit more light, lower ISO and better DOF control with the X10.

4 upvotes
limlh
By limlh (Jul 12, 2012)

The RX100 is in a different category - pocketable. When LX7 is announced with 1 inch sensor, and Fujifilm don't respond with an X20 upgrade soon, Fujifilm can say goodbye to this compact category as well.

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jul 12, 2012)

Good review,

But this camera still fails to impress me, compared with the other options currently available out there, not even considering the hiccup about the orbs.

There's something about Mary...

.

6 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Jul 12, 2012)

Is your avatar taken by the x10? it's one big white orb.

2 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Jul 12, 2012)

Yes, you are quite right.

It was from that episode that this avatar came about.

It was around the same time when DPR opened the option of avatars to users.

1 upvote
lightandday
By lightandday (Jul 12, 2012)

Thank you dpr - I will read it tonight in full!

1 upvote
matt k
By matt k (Jul 12, 2012)

Fair review. Battery life gets better after a few recyles and though I carry 2 extra batteries I rarely have to use them on a full days shoot. In regards to the white orbs problem, I have shot about 15000 shots, (general street photography), with the X10 and have only seen about 5 frames with orbs. Just not a problem with my camera. I will not bother getting the sensor replaced. Finally....the camera is a joy to use mainly because of the manual zoom lens and the optical viewfinder. Image quality is very good but more specifically....the colours are just beautiful and have a quality not matched by any other camera I have owned, DSLR or otherwise.

1 upvote
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (Jul 12, 2012)

Since it's taken this long for a revised X10, and since there's no way of telling which cameras have the new sensor, then I may as well wait for the X20 just to be sure.

3 upvotes
Total comments: 155
12