Just Posted: Fujifilm X100S Review

Are you sure you know what you're going on about? It really doesn't look like you do.

Don't listen to the troll regarding the X100s (He owns a lemon Canon M camera. Maybe he works for Canon?). I use to own the X100 and yes it was buggy, but the X100s is a whole lot better camera. I also use a Nikon D700 & Olympus OM-D, but the the X100s is a such a quiet and fun camera to use.

i do shoot with shadow tones set to -1 or -2, and i still feel the camera clips blacks more than my x10, which has a sensor 1/6 as large. it's clear from the DR test in the x100s review that there is 2 stops less DR in the blacks, compared to the x-e1, x100, x10, etc. in the example images, I can see much more detail on the spools of thread in the shadows, on images from the x-e1

i guess this could be a side effect of phase detect pixels, but x100s images processed from RAW look about the same as the x-e1 (just a slight bit less shadow DR)

it is a little weird that blacks are trimmed so much. i've felt this for a while now, but didn't think i'd eventually learn shadow dynamic range is quite a bit less

It's funny how the same people who hated X100 all of a sudden thinks X100 was so amazing! The truth is many don't even own either.

Exactly. And since the X100S is on backorder (and has been for ages) your comment about a 'sweet resellers deal' is somewhat off the mark.

Depending on the type of photography you partake in, it can be a real advantage to be able to alter aperture and shutter speed v rapidly. Then there is the joy of using something that is ergonomically 'right'. Finally the IQ produced by your $100-200 compact soon makes sure that the romance with the X100 is back on again!

Felts what about any of the other large sensor compacts/mirrorless like EOS M I mention many times below. Very few times would all aperture and shutter speed and ISO sensitivity need to be changed rapidly. Never in something like pro-level sports from personal experience.

When I worked on the Sony team for the NEX development it was intentional to have the first models with less dials and buttons.

Personally I like to keep my index finger always on the shutter release ready at all times so I have my thumb doing all the settings and off-hand holding the camera. It is not necessarily ideal to be moving your thumb all over the place. It does depend on the photography.

For you it's not important to have an aperture ring, for many it is.
Many people have chosen the Fujifilm systems just because there are physical dials and buttons they can use as opposed to some competition.

These are different products for different people.

World is a wonderful thing with its diversity :)

You know how many pros shoot JPG these days in in FF DLSRs? RAW editing takes too much time for people with deadlines. Wedding photographers and hobbyists are probably the biggest RAW users. Just don't tell me RAW=PRO and JPG=amateur. JPG is ideal for people who need to spend more time with a camera in their face than a mouse in their hand.

@sgoldswo

This camera applies noise reduction directly to the RAW image before it saves it. That means RAW is not truly RAW for this camera, EVER.

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.

I think it would be a challenge to find an undoctored RAW camera in this day and age. They all like to hide some flaws.

Does the EM-5 or GX7 have an APS-C sensor and optical viewfinder?

Inthemist, you need to define why that aps-c sensor is a benefit. Listing a tech spec doesnt automagically make it better.

Fair enough, but as a user of both I would say the image quality is better overall with the X100S. The point where the E-M5 might win is at F2 because the X100S is soft at that aperture.

As others have pointed out, the high speed flash sync is incredibly useful. Combine that with output from the X-trans APS-C sensor that not only exceeds the Sony 16mp M43s sensor but most other APS-C sensors, faster AF (than an E-M5 with the Panny 20mm mounted) an OVF and some incredibly intuitive controls and the shooting experience plus image quality makes for an incredibly satisfying camera.

Can the Fuji use an F1.4 lens instead of an F2.0 lens?

Of course not but your final point was that the fixed lens camera offers no benefit over an ilc which is simply not true for some cases.

Dotes, which one don't have have manual shooting mode or manual focus out of the ones with a good sensor size and image quality? That is the ability to set low limits of shutter and pre-focus. How would you need it as a unique and highlighted function separate from these common modes?

How is manually setting focus for a distance not the same as pre-focusing for a certain distance? Does not make sense. No matter what terms you use - set the camera for a distance using auto focus or manual focus, keep on manual focus, shoot when subject is that distance. You don't need distance scale on camera or the lens to do it.

It takes a lot more accuracy to do it with sports back in the days of no AF using telephoto lenses and large aperture than it does street shooting from the hip - nobody would use a distance scale for this but manually focus it first. Scales are never perfectly accurate and there were no laser range finders.

Sum it up - any camera with manual focus can be pre-focused or zone focused within 5 seconds time.

It is not a simple number counting game. Yes it got quite a number of "cons", but I looked at the pros, and it was those that really matters (image IQ, responsiveness, AF accuracy...)

What's wrong with having it? Can be quite useful, even some pros like it on olympus e-m5. And how you can even link face detection and 'idiot mode'. Or are you still using only manual focus and consider everyone who is using AF 'noobs'?

As a user of the X100 and XP1 I would love face detect. I went to a music festival recently and every pic of me is OOF because I handed the cam to a non-photographer. Face detect would have negated this issue.

I'm always amused at haters that resort to insults and put downs. If someone doesn't like to use face detection, keep the feature turned "off." It's hilarious to see some feel threatened by face detection. I suppose if future Fuji cameras add face detection, people like "samhain" will automatically consider to those cameras as not "real" cameras.

David, you've made that point several times in the comments already, and you've also sent me three personal emails about the same matter. I respect your opinion, but at this point you're just trolling, whether you realise it or not.

All this negativity coming from someone who's back up camera is an EOS-M. The camera that's one of the biggest dogs of an ILC to come down the pike in years? The camera that Canon lowered the price to $299.00 with a lens? The camera that they're giving you the body for free when you buy the lens just to get it out of their inventory because it's so bad? That's what you use as your basis to slam the images and quality of the X100S? Really?

Ease off the throttle Davey-boy. Take a card to your favorite camera shop, shoot a bit at the counter and then take it home and play with the images. I was not optimistic either until i did this.

The camera is really beautiful, the AF changes fixed all the things I hated about the X100 and it take a great photo. Saving up for one as I write this.

I agree with David which I believe has something to do with the blown out highlights or default exposure of the S.
I believe the x100s has to be underexposed or used with the DR expansion to maintain those highlights. It's as though Fujifilm moved the DR of this camera to the shadow regions.

I'm of the opinion that the image quality of the X100 is still the no. 1. Nevertheless, the X100s earns the gold medal.

I owned the X100, gave it to my daughter when I received the X100S. My main rant with the X100 is that it was slow to focus. I also have an Olympus OM-D and a 5D3. The slowest is the X100S, HOWEVER, the image quality is so good, even at high ISOs (I can use it at night, outdoors, with light from poles, stores and such), that it keeps amazing me. And, I own a Retina Mac, so I can see the quality. The Olympus is also incredible for its size, but is different and hard to describe. It's quite sharp, but the Fuji has a strange combination of sharpness and "creaminess". Now I don't go out with just one camera: it's either the Olympus or the Canon AND always the Fuji. BTW, the ND filter in itself is the great bonus. I live in the Caribbean, without that filter, things would have been different.

And that's exactly why people use it with great results.
Seriously.

You absolutely need to post it a few more times and send Barney a few more emails. People immediately will stop using Fujifilm cameras or start producing crappy images with them.

Does not compute, does not compute... Fatal error.

Sorry David, you sounded a bit like a computer there for a second...

LOL

Conveniently ignoring the studio comparison shots, are you ? Too lame.

Are you just upset that the X100S is as good as it is and you are using an EOS-M or are you upset that you paid full price for your EOS-M before the bottom fell out on the price of a true "dog" of a camera. Sounds like equipment envy.

Anyone who has actually used an X100S at this point will know which portions of the review are acceptable as fact, which are nit picking issues and which (like using inferior RAW processors for your sample images) have no merit at all.

Scott you don't find it hilarious that you need to buy third party software to get what X-Trans fans are saying is proper results? It is already a very expensive camera that does not match the $299 EOS-M in still image or video quality. What is the main purpose of a camera?

All the buttons, dials, hybrid viewfinder, cool styling in the world does not mean anything if their use doesn't provide superior result.

Many people shoot RAW + JPEG and discard RAW file if the exposure is good - Fujifilm has a history of great JPEG on and off but it needs to be on for a $1,000+ camera and it is not. X100S JPEG has almost lost some detail at ISO 800 that the cheap, fail EOS-M has at ISO 3200!

X100S and X-E1 should have better detail than they do with JPEG, bundled software, and Adobe. Still, I am hoping to see a posted source of images converted from the recommended third party software listed all over the comments here - or it is only smoke and mirrors.

Well i think you have said it plenty of time oh almighty one ! Thanks for sharing some of your infinite wisdom upon us puny mortals and PLEASE feel free to move on with your life and grace other forums with your presence and wisdom while millions of us enjoy our false fantasies here… LOL

Who's buying third party software for what? Really, for Xtrans results? How about everyone else that shoots RAW on any camera that has a Bayer or Foveon sensor too? Or did Canon/Nikon and all the other manufacturers purchase Adobe, Apple and all the other manufacturers of RAW processing software so they are no longer third party?

Other than Iredient for Mac (which from what I've read trumps just about everything else available for processing X trans files) I've had good results with Silkypix that comes with the camera from Fuji. Never really used the others so I'm not all that concerned with how much better workflow is with the other options. Silypix works fine for me.

Maybe if more people would actually use Silkypix for it's intended purpose rather than complaining about how the workflow isn't as smooth as what they do importing into one program, then working the image in another then complain that the images look muddy or plastic there wouldn't be all this issue.

Fuji has a great RAW processor for Xtans packaged with the camera. They gave all the needed algorithems to the other software manufacturers. You or anyone else choosing to use a subpar RAW processing program put out by another software company is Fuji's fault in what way?

People should try what is known to work correctly or quit complaining.

As far as video is concerned, Fuji ain't Canikon. They have obviously intended their cameras to be for still images with the option to shoot video. They aren't selling a $1300 camcorder. If I want to shoot video for personal use I'll buy an HD camcorder.

Leica just added video to the new "M" for the first time. How many Leica shooters do you think give two hoots about having video in that camera or said "Oh, I just bought a Leica M9 and I'm so upset because I can't shoot video".

Go play with your EOS-M or NEX for video and let the grown ups enjoy a "real" camera.

Lol @ the Canon M. I wouldn't use one if it was free.
The x100/x100s is a work of art that has yet to be copied. That hybrid viewfinder is one of the greatest camera inventions in the past 20 years.

Well, and the fact that we're shooting the X100S much closer to the scene, and it's a 35mm wideangle, not a short telephoto...

So then what is the excuse for the Nikon A and Ricoh GR looking better?

They are both 28mm lenses vs. 35mm so according to your statement they should look even worse than the Fuji.

We irish can be a bit fuzzy at times.