Previous news story    Next news story

Fujifilm X100S Real-world Samples

By dpreview staff on Mar 18, 2013 at 21:59 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $1,299.00

We've just added a 39-image gallery of real-world pictures to our preview of the Fujifilm X100S. The X100S is the sucessor to the X100, one of our favorite cameras of the past couple of years, but one that was not without its share of quirks. The X100S features a new 16MP X-Trans sensor, a hybrid AF system with on-sensor phase-detection autofocus and numerous operational improvements. We previewed the new camera earlier this year and we'll be adding more content to that as we work towards a full review but for now, click the links below to see our gallery of real-world samples. 

Fujifilm X100S Real-world Samples Gallery

There are 39 images in the Fujifilm X100S preview samples gallery, including JPEGs and a handful of Raw files converted 'to taste' in Adobe Camera Raw 7.4RC. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Fujifilm X100S Preview Samples Gallery - published 18th March 2013
770
I own it
627
I want it
187
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Fujifilm X100S

Comments

Total comments: 205
12
flumpet
By flumpet (Mar 24, 2013)

check out my day out in san francisco today

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/8391-x100s-in-san-francisco/

0 upvotes
InTheMist
By InTheMist (Mar 25, 2013)

Love the processing!

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 21, 2013)

For those who have not seen, a little more info from X100S.

X100S test shots from 100 to 25600 ISO. Macro shots from f2 to f16. And some studio shots.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ralfs-foto-bude/sets/72157632861480075/

Fujifilm X100S - Unboxing & My Review from the same author(35min.):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r65_9ewvHm0&feature=youtu.be

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (Mar 24, 2013)

That's a great review. I really like the way he shows you inside the viewfinder.

0 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Mar 21, 2013)

Is DSCF0135 a father-daughter shot?

Pretty nice.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 22, 2013)

No - I think Scott (a member of the dpreview team, who does not have kids) has just found his level :)

0 upvotes
MI6G
By MI6G (Mar 24, 2013)

http://strobist.blogspot.com/2013/03/in-depth-new-fujifilm-x100s.html The colors are amazing . and check this one :http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/ . the Fujifilm X100S preview samples here look great is just the weather winter season less sun equal less saturation and color.

0 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (Mar 21, 2013)

The colors here are true to the NW during winter season (less sun equal less saturation and color). Also that Dpreview choose to take photos of rusted rural area, giving the more earthly color tones. Hardly saw anything red or action shots.

dpreview if you need somebody to take test colorful test pictures in Seattle, I can do it. Tired of going to Glazer's and doing instore test shots. The Fremont summer solstices parade is coming.

0 upvotes
MI6G
By MI6G (Mar 20, 2013)

this is my first review here so before talking about detail or something else The images were a little soft straight out of the Fujifilm FinePix X100S at the default sharpening setting and ideally require some further sharpening in an application like Adobe Photoshop, or you can change the in-camera setting.(http://www.photographyblog.com) The Fujifilm FinePix X100S's 23mm lens handled chromatic aberrations brilliantly. The Fujifilm FinePix X100S produces images of outstanding quality. It recorded noise-free JPEG images at ISO 100 all the way up to 3200, with a little noise at ISO 6400 and more visible noise and slight colour desaturation at the fastest settings of ISO 12800 and 25600, an amazing performance for a CAMERA with an APS-C SENSOR.
The Fujifilm Finepix X100S has 2 different image quality settings available, with Fine being the highest quality option. The default sharpening setting is great BUT if you use the FINE sharpening the results are just amazing .

1 upvote
OfcrMike
By OfcrMike (Mar 20, 2013)

As I read some of the critiques, I found myself wondering if I had been looking at the same samples as those critics... "lack detail", "too soft", "smeared detail", etc - unless we're comparing the X100S to 40MP medium format cameras (we're not, right?) these ooc jpegs look pretty darn good, imho. This is a 16MP APS-C camera, and I think its jpegs hold their own against a 16MP FF DSLR.

I'm almost certain some critics have confused a slightly oof area in some images for being soft or smeared or whatever adjective they were using. The shooter's choice of focus-point with closer subjects may be questionable, but the lens/sensor's resolution is not.

Scrolling down, there's someone complaining about moire in the indoor-girl's jacket. I saw it too in the "original"-sized image when I downloaded it, but as soon as I re-oriented the image 90 degrees, it went away. That was an artifact of the monitor, not the image sensor; X-trans seems to have moire well-controlled w/o AA filter.

1 upvote
photog4u
By photog4u (Mar 20, 2013)

You're traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's the signpost up ahead— your next stop, the Twilight Zone! ;)

3 upvotes
OfcrMike
By OfcrMike (Mar 20, 2013)

Yeah. Twilight Zone was a good show. Did you ever watch The Outer Limits? That was a good one too.

0 upvotes
umbalito
By umbalito (Mar 21, 2013)

Compared to a similar APS-C with no anti-aliasing filter like the K5 IIs, I'd say these results are actually similar to the XE1/X Pro1, which just aren't as good as they should be.

Even compared to one with a fairly weak anti-aliasing filter like the OMD, the X-trans files just don't seem to have the resolution expected from a supposedly AA-less sensor.

Which is not to say they're bad, but speaking for myself, the sensor just doesn't seem to perform as expected (similar to the XE1/Xpro-1)

You can compare the XE1 and XPro 1 vs the K5 IIs, and the OMD right here on DPReview or on the Imaging Resource comparometer, and I think the samples will speak for themselves. No need to even compare to the D800.

0 upvotes
armanius
By armanius (Mar 20, 2013)

Most photos seem to lack detail even at low ISO. They look really soft too, almost as if it was off focus.

2 upvotes
wolfloid
By wolfloid (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm seeing very smeared detail in the two portraits of the girl with glasses (303 &149). The eye detail is smeared away and the hair looks very unnatural and totally lacking in detail. Obviously this is with the downloaded JPEG at maximum size. I've never seen anything like this with my 5DII (but then I never shoot JPEG).

Is this missed focus, anti-noise smoothing or something worse. Is it just very bad photography, or is it something inherently wrong in the camera/sensor?

3 upvotes
goosel
By goosel (Mar 20, 2013)

ISO 2000. It's strong noise reduction you're seeing

0 upvotes
wolfloid
By wolfloid (Mar 20, 2013)

OK, but should it really have such a strong affect at such a moderate ISO? And, why the hell are they using such a high level of detail destroying noise reduction in example photos? What is the photographer doing here? The noise level should not be so high at that ISO, and even if it were, the photographer should at least have the nouse to let us see it. Jeez, what incompetence!

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 20, 2013)

@goosel, I have the same opinion. This detail also calls my attention.

0 upvotes
blu3
By blu3 (Mar 20, 2013)

I got mine about last week,
IMO, the jpeg straight out from the camera is very nice, up to 12k ISO is usable. You would likely need to use x100s film simulation to bring out the best of the scenes though, the B/W shots are amazing.
AF is quite fast, comparable with SLR body with kit lens.
Theres a few times that the camera locks up/card error when turning on after a standby mode. - but I think they would get this fixed with the next firmware.

2 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (Mar 20, 2013)

Great photos as always! So please don't take this as criticism of your beloved home of Seattle, but does the DP Review crew realize that most of what they shoot is in the sadness tones of blue, grey, brown, and black? Take a look at your thumbnails and you'll see that the predominant colors are those found only in the Northwest.

Specifically in this collection, the only real colors are in tiny amounts like the purse and the rose bush, and some of the airplane markings.
Happy, saturated, rainbow colors like yellow, orange, purple, and electric blue are almost completely absent.

I have relatives there and know part of the problem is the general Scandinavian culture of old Seattle, people there are reserved, not showy.
Seasonal Affective Disorder is a serious problem in northern latitudes, and it can sneak up on a man without him knowing. But there's an easy cure, get out and shoot subjects with some color to them, you'll feel much better about yourselves and about life.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (Mar 20, 2013)

IQ is okay IMO. And the picture of this old dusty cash box is the one I like most. But how does the lens react when the sun is just outside or just inside the frame? The X100 is said to have serious problems with such lighting conditions.

0 upvotes
blu3
By blu3 (Mar 20, 2013)

I took my x100s a few times on a very sunny day in a boat, there no major issue.

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 20, 2013)

@blu3, You can share with us some photos of X100S without PP? I would be grateful.
My biggest question is not in macro mode, is not to much relevant to me. But the way the camera can withstand the highlights, is my biggest concern.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Kwick1
By Kwick1 (Mar 19, 2013)

Wow, these...ummm...suck. Lifeless colors, no accutance, flat, digital appearance. I was seriously considering ordering one, but not now. Yes, the high ISO shots were nice, but that's not enough when everything else is so bad.

5 upvotes
Dan Nikon
By Dan Nikon (Mar 20, 2013)

I'm sorry but this is just flat out uninformed.

The camera-holder could have used the "Astia" setting with deeper blacks like I do on the X100 and just knocked it out of the park in a place like Pike Place Market that just ooozes great wraps of mixed light. As part of a 6 year book project, I shot for a week in Seattle when it was mostly the same kind of light and came away with outright luscious Kodachromes.

This site *should* be like a Car and Driver road test. No one expects the reviewer to drive it like he stole, just use the darn camera like HE shoots it, like HE owns it. Otherwise, there is nothing real world about these kinds of galleries because in the real world, even an amateur would have put more of an effort into putting some style and panache into the final products.

The camera is fine, it is the "photographer" that failed to really show what can be done with it.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 21, 2013)

Really Dan? You're still talking?

4 upvotes
Dan Nikon
By Dan Nikon (Mar 21, 2013)

You need to re-think how those who shoot these cameras "Real-World" use them to give examples of what the cameras can do. This is not unique to you Barney but instead, seems to be an issue with every gallery like this on every review, nearly making all cameras look the same. It does the viewer, the makers of the cameras and the validity of the site no favors.

But what do I know, I am just a professional photographer, not a blogger or camera tester...

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 22, 2013)

And hopefully you have more than 3 days to pull together samples galleries, you probably have access to a vehicle, professional models and it's OK if you touch the pics up in Photoshop. Spare a thought for those of us on the other side.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Dave Luttmann
By Dave Luttmann (Mar 28, 2013)

Barney, considering Dan's credentials, you should be showing him more respect. If you new anything about his work, you wouldnt have bothered with the models and photoshop comments.

0 upvotes
Peter62
By Peter62 (Mar 19, 2013)

The Hi-ISO images are phantastic!

I am highly impressed!

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (Mar 20, 2013)

If the real ISO and marked ISO are the same...X100 has real ISO1000 at ISO1600-6400.

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 19, 2013)

I'm waiting the final review from this model and waiting more real world examples from everybody and their opinions. I would like the review of the Coolpix A coincides with the X100S model too. Until then, keep some reservations.

0 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Mar 19, 2013)

X100s Studio shots

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

0 upvotes
DaytonR
By DaytonR (Mar 19, 2013)

I really liked the image of the filled up trash can , brilliant !

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Mar 19, 2013)

I think I was right, I kept my X100 - maybe next year FUJI ;)

0 upvotes
obeythebeagle
By obeythebeagle (Mar 19, 2013)

We are all so ridiculously spoiled with the newest generation of cameras from the leading manufacturers. They all deliver amazing results, and now you can cherry-pick the unique features you want, and wait a few months for the prices to come down. I remember being amazed when SLRs first offered through-the lens metering! The first time I heard about autofocus, I thought they were taking away my favorite thing to do with a camera.

6 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (Mar 19, 2013)

Why do most of the 'Real World' samples on this web site all seem to be subjects that do not require a photo release?

Most of the 'Real World' shots we DPReview readers take are not the 'Real World' photos displayed in this article.

Please take this as constructive in nature.
Providing real 'Real World' photos would be very helpful to all of us here, both management and us readers.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

Examples?

3 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

Strange comment imo.

The images in this gallery (IMO) represent the kind of images most people make with the original X100, and will probably make with the X100S.

This is a small, take everywhere camera that is great for walking around and travel. You can use the camera for whatever genre you like, but I feel the images in this gallery represent how most people will use this camera.

Besides, the point of these galleries are to see what a camera is capable of at different exposures, different apertures, and different ISO's. People like you and I should be able to take that info and then determine what genres this or any other camera will be good at.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
CarlPH
By CarlPH (Mar 19, 2013)

Surprise! your world was actually different than theirs :)

2 upvotes
TakePictures
By TakePictures (Mar 19, 2013)

Indeed, these sample photographs were obviously taken in Second Life with a virtual X100s. Ridiculous!

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 19, 2013)

"Why do most of the 'Real World' samples on this web site all seem to be subjects that do not require a photo release?"

Honestly, how many photos "require" a photo release or are worthy of publication? Do most of yours? Mine certainly don't.
The sample images are meant to give you an idea of the IQ the camera is capable of, not to show off the photographer's artistic talent.

"Most of the 'Real World' shots we DPReview readers take are not the 'Real World' photos displayed in this article."

Who are "we DPReview readers"? Do you know us all, and have you seen our real world photos?
I think the sample galleries are just fine, considering their purpose. I just don't have the same expectations as when I visit the Louvre.

4 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (Mar 19, 2013)

Hello Barney''

Sure: 1 - A family sitting around a table in a restaurant.

A child a few pews in front yawning - widely, ha.

A bride and her groom and then her family

A couple's quick kiss taken by a passerby willing to take your shot.

A dog running toward you and across your FOV.

A newspaper article one does not want to forget.

An accident scene taken under stressful conditions.

I can go on but I am sure you know what I am getting at.

Thanks. For your request for examples.

PS - just got my D7100, from the big A of course.

See. My post in the DX forum for D7....

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

You... realise I only had a couple of days to take these, right...?

0 upvotes
PJInTheUSA
By PJInTheUSA (Mar 19, 2013)

Lol. Lordy. I know people have high expectations but these .... cloud cocky land.

0 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (Mar 20, 2013)

Hi Barney,

First please note my comment was constructive.

It is not your work or time frame that matters.

It is that DPReview was never set up to capture 'Real World' photos as I stated.

This is the time you should ponder my suggestion and pass it on to the editors or whomever to consider it.

Imagine DPReview giving a lucky bride free photography for testing various cameras at her wedding.
There are many ways to take 'Real World' photos, it is just DPReview has to gear up to do so.

It will be helpful to all of us.

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (Mar 20, 2013)

He's requesting more cats, babies and selfies. .

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Nikonworks
By Nikonworks (Mar 20, 2013)

And it is about time somebody did!

1 upvote
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Mar 21, 2013)

More photos of horseshoe crabs, please.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Mar 19, 2013)

Sigh. I had this camera on pre-order. But then I had to buy a 300/2.8 for baseball season. The 300/2.8 will pay for itself, but the wife cannot quite wrap her head around that. If I brought home yet another new toy I'd be in the dog house deep. Enjoy folks, guess I'll get one next year.

2 upvotes
Andrew Elliott
By Andrew Elliott (Mar 19, 2013)

Sometimes in life you must just face that doghouse and walk right on in.

7 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Mar 19, 2013)

The dough is fluffy.

0 upvotes
digby dart
By digby dart (Mar 19, 2013)

Perhaps a return of the dislike button might ease the pantomime around these parts.

11 upvotes
elvedhel
By elvedhel (Mar 19, 2013)

what people fail to realise is these are taken by a pro tog, they are snapshots giving some idea of the cameras ability. images are nice and sharp, good colour range and depsite a few flaws most of these are more related to poor PP than the camera itself. yes theres still some clipping issues with the xtrans sensor when using adobe to convert but this is hardly the cameras fault.
as an X-E1 owner since its UK release ive compared side by side in depth and magnified images taken on the fuji compared to those taken on my old Canon DSLR and can quite happily say the Fuji images are of a better quality.
As with most DSLRS now you can pick them up and start shooting within 5 minutes, the FUJI X series you need to learn how to get the most out of it, and that in one respect is whats so appealing about them. and once learned you really begin to get a feel for what these amazing cameras can do.

6 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (Mar 19, 2013)

Everybody's going to be be oohing and ahhing over this camera when they see what gifted artists can do with it.

4 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Mar 20, 2013)

Yes, a whole new batch of cappuccino shots uploaded to flickr.

0 upvotes
GeorgeFellows
By GeorgeFellows (Mar 19, 2013)

Bit worried about the dynamic range...probably best to wait for the full review to tell me and not my eyes, but those plane shots have some awfully clipped highlights (in my eyes). Sold my X100 recently to get a 60D so I can shoot my bros wedding, might buy another X100 but the image quality doesn't look any better (especially not for another £800) on the S and I don't need super fast autofocus etc... for the shots I would use it for.

2 upvotes
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Mar 19, 2013)

Noticed that too...
It also tends to happen on skin tones, which is not that good.
Nice indoor photos in the museum, though.

1 upvote
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

I doubt the camera is in 'wide dynamic range' mode. I use this all the time on my X100 and the dynamic range is incredible. Best I have used in any camera, including Pro jobs. The ISO in Wide Dynamic range mode is 800 and the difference is negligible when compared to the camera's quality at its base ISO of 200.

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Mar 19, 2013)

I disagree.
What I am seeing is exposure bias for the very dark interior of the cockpit with the sunlit windows in the BG being blown out at ISO 3200.
The difference between this performance and any other camera on the market under these circumstances would be invisible.

I think we have to realize the current fashion of chirping on about DR stems from ignorance about light, image processing and the hope that a new metric will validate a bit of gear.
The performance of the camera in these images reflects an average photographer's walkabout results. Excellent, but also indistinguishable from any number of cameras, especially when presented on the web. The delight in this camera will stem from all the usability, pocket ability and nostalgia it evokes in addition to its excellent IQ.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
Dennis Linden
By Dennis Linden (Mar 19, 2013)

it might evoke nostalgia for some of us, but hopefully for others it will open their eyes to a different way of taking pictures...

2 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (Mar 19, 2013)

I love the pictures. They make people look younger. They have this Terminator Liquid Skin effect that hides wrinkles. I think the camera is great for people but no so great for 'outdoor views'

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
ashwins
By ashwins (Mar 19, 2013)

Nice set of pictures.

X100s seems to have the tendency to overexpose a little, though.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

Rectified if the shooter...

a) Paid attention to the histogram in viewfinder and/or
b) Put the camera in Wide Dynamic Range mode

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

The shooter did both.

6 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

@Barney Britton

That's not exactly true is it Barney. On the X100S there are two wide dynamic range modes 200% (minimum ISO400) and 400% (minimum ISO800). About 21 of the pictures have an ISO under ISO800 and 15 of these under ISO400, ergo, Dynamic Range of 200% and 400% was not used. Page 73 of the X100S manual for those shot in jpg. I don't know which ones were shot RAW.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

You are right - I did not shoot EVERY SINGLE ONE of these samples at ISO 400 and above. Because that's not a sensible way to construct a samples gallery.

0 upvotes
John
By John (Mar 19, 2013)

If the shooter paid attention to the histogram, then either (a) the shooter didn't use the exposure compensation dial or (b) the histogram wasn't right.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Dan Nikon
By Dan Nikon (Mar 19, 2013)

The "photographer" overexposed most of them and chose poorly in terms of light that would reveal this camera's true ability in terms of spatial color relationships, only a couple start to pull the saturation threshold into the range of what a professionally exposed color neg or chrome should look like. David Alan Harvey has one of these and the few pics he has posted just utterly blow these flat-tastic happy snaps away...

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 20, 2013)

@ Wye - what's your obsession with DR modes on X series cameras? I don't get it, I have X100 and X-Pro1 and I never use DR modes, shoot RAW and you can get the same result, problem solved and you are not limited only to look given to you by JPEG engine.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
philcozz
By philcozz (Mar 19, 2013)

High ISO looks pretty nice, to me.

1 upvote
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (Mar 19, 2013)

Image quality wise, X100 is a phenomenal camera, and I suppose X100s as well. I took some of best photos of my life with it.
But the original X100 was unpolished and in many operational regards flawed. I'm glad Fuji has addressed some of them. It would be nice they have dumped that damned wheel off the back, and used the X-Pro1 approach instead.
The X100s would be even better.

2 upvotes
phoozy
By phoozy (Mar 19, 2013)

Don't wanna be rude, but I don't like the look of the pictures.
Quite a few people seem to be selling their x-series cameras and I wonder why.

5 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 19, 2013)

They looks nice in tiny size, but once viewed in larger one (3rd picture in the sequence) XTrans issues become obvious: the RX1 shows much better picture for the same dimensions as does any properly PPed bayer camera.

3 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 19, 2013)

for the triple price, sure ;)

1 upvote
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 19, 2013)

I also mentioned you will have higher IQ at base ISO (and about the same IQ at high ISO) with the same Sony 16Mp sensor, but bayer CFA with proper PP.

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 20, 2013)

@ Emacs23 - if your comment regarding Sony's 16MP sensor and NEX cameras was true, I'd be using NEX6/7 now instead of X-Pro1. I don't have unlimited source of money so before I buy something I test it myself (beauty of return policies here in the UK) and I can tell you right now that X-Pro1 produces better results than NEX cameras - those are my findings with my subjects of photography and don't even get me started on the usability and overall easy of use/satisfaction of taking photographs.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 20, 2013)

@hexxthalion — I believe it's optics you had for NEX and now Fuji and your inability to PP properly. I'm just using leica M lenses which top notch performers and thus fuji samples didn't impress me much. Plus, I know a lot about posprocessing from the theoretical standpoint, from the mosaic data interpretation through applying NR, tonal curves, etc to converting into final colorspace (sRGB/whatever), and thus I was very skeptical about Fuji claims about high ISO performance, sharpness, etc. This tricks with color profiles and OOC JPEG processing just can't confuse me, I'm too expirienced for this. Well, too many words. Now a pic: these are 3 bayer cameras (NEX-7, Pentax K-5 iis — 16Mp, NEX-5n — 16Mp). The worst, the bottom right, is OOC Fuji JPEG. Pretty bad for fuji, huh?
These are imagingresource.com samples. No one could make better for Fuji than I did for bayer cameras yet and I highly doubt ever will.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/12196364/gallery/different/scale.png

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 20, 2013)

@ Emacs23 - I'm pretty good with PP software, been graphic designer for 15 years (started with PS 3) and have been using LR since first BETA, Aperture from first version and lately I've been using C1. I shoot only RAW, not JPEG so every single capture I decide to keep goes through PP.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 20, 2013)

Then give us at least equal to bayer resolution ;)

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 20, 2013)

The sample you uploaded to dropbox - that's from IR, those are JPEG files are they not? and for some reason when I compare NEX6 with X-Pro1 I do not see any advantage of bayer over x-trans - not sure what it is you're on about. But either way it proves nothing since these are OOC JPEG files, so that's comparison of in-camera JPEG engines.

I haven't done such 'scientific' comparison when I was deciding which camera to get. I went out and shot few photographs and then looked at them, looked at what can be done with the RAW data, looked at how much PP it would need to reach desired finish and so on. And I was surprised because I wanted to get originally NEX7 because of the focus peaking and ended up with X-Pro1 instead without focus peaking - oh well :)

0 upvotes
skimble
By skimble (Mar 19, 2013)

The snow shot does it for me, close up was never the big deal with the X100 ether. Would I sell my X100 to get the X100s nope but for sure better in operational sense, Image a tiny bit but not considerable better. Still the best compact camera with the best OOC JEPG "no fuzz PP"
I still look for this all rounder compact with zoom lens 500mm and delivers IQ of a DSLR with 500mm lens :-) one can dream

0 upvotes
arpikusz
By arpikusz (Mar 19, 2013)

Is it just me or do these pictures have two things in common?

1. bad light
2. bad composition

And sometimes bad white balance. :(

3 upvotes
raducdz
By raducdz (Mar 19, 2013)

This is not an art gallery... in my opinion, the only thing I dislike is X-trans performance...

2 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Mar 19, 2013)

That's just you.

6 upvotes
solsang
By solsang (Mar 19, 2013)

Many of the photo examples at dp suffer from haphazard shooting, to mimic real life? Any normal user would at least look for interesting compositions and compose accordingly, which would give much better examples, since we are used to work with the balanced and interesting photos taken with our own cameras.

This is one of the reasons i started distrusting dp reviews, sadly...

1 upvote
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

This is a real world SAMPLES gallery. It looks as if the shooter has picked up the camera and just gone out for a casual shoot here and there.

I think the shot of the girl at ISO6400 at f2.8 is pretty phenomenal for a casual shot. And she has a nice smile.

4 upvotes
felixspencer
By felixspencer (Mar 19, 2013)

There is an exposure compensation dial on the top plate for a reason, strangley the photographer here has completley ignored it as he/she must favour clipped highlights

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
1 upvote
zinedi
By zinedi (Mar 19, 2013)

Great camera - not only for IQ equalizing the FF quality in compact size, but also for handling comfort - Fuji is listening to PHOTOGRAPHERS not consumers - and classic range-finder style. Looking forward to hold my copy.

1 upvote
raducdz
By raducdz (Mar 19, 2013)

"IQ equalizing the FF quality"? You might want to check the samples again, at 100%

7 upvotes
_Federico_
By _Federico_ (Mar 19, 2013)

No cropped camera can "equalizing" the "FF quality". Simply different format means different quality, no matters how good is the smaller sensor. Can't match a bigger one.
Try to work with 2 formats and print several pictures...

0 upvotes
Marcelobtp
By Marcelobtp (Mar 19, 2013)

@_Federico_ You probably don't know that x-trans uses a diferent bayer, the size is only comparable when using the same technology. People probably is not paying atention that mot of the images are over 2000 iso. This camera is clearly much better than any aps-c sensor out there, no questioning. FF IQ, yes i have a d700 the limitation here i think is the quality of the lens.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
LensBeginner
By LensBeginner (Mar 19, 2013)

I would like to have the rationale behind aperture/time/iso choices explained before making assumptions.
I mean DSCF0303 was probably shot @ 1/170th in order to freeze motion, but then why DSCF0186 (flowers) is at 1/1000th, f/2 (wide open) and iso 320? Not much DOF effect there either.
Is that in order to give a sample for a broader range of aperture/time/iso combinations?

EDIT: I have now read the comment below about flower size and focusing distance. Makes a little more sense now. Maybe integrating comments about situation/conditions/notes etc. into photo captions in the gallery?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HBowman
By HBowman (Mar 19, 2013)

OK :D The Sigma DP line have nothing to worry about :)

6 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Mar 19, 2013)

Cameras generally don't worry. Fanboys do.

23 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Mar 19, 2013)

Nah.. Don't like how exposure meter works. Looks like Fuji tends to overexpose as well.

2 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

Rectified if the photog...

a) Paid attention and used the histogram
b) Used the exposure compensation knob
c) Used Wide Dynamic Range mode

Problem solved! I've had simply the best exposures from my X100.

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 19, 2013)

@ Wye - shooting JPEG? (regarding DR200/400 settings)

0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

@hexxthalion

Sorry, I should have specified dynamic ranges modes of 200% and 400% applies to JPG only (as far as I know). DR400% is amazing.

0 upvotes
jon404
By jon404 (Mar 19, 2013)

Images aside, what kind of airplane is that black 'Bad Kitty'?

0 upvotes
McDuff
By McDuff (Mar 19, 2013)

I think that it's a P-38 Lightning. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning>.

0 upvotes
Whopper
By Whopper (Mar 19, 2013)

It's an Grumman F7F Tigercat.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

Tigercat. In STUNNING condition at the Heritage Collection in Seattle. Still flies several times a year.

0 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 19, 2013)

uhmm... a mix of feelings now...
Anyway, just one question, Barney you know what distance the flowers were photographed and the Macro mode was turned On?

Just curious, because the closest focusing distance is Approx. 50cm / 1.6 ft. to infinity, and the minimum Macro mode focusing distance drops to Approx.10cm - 2.0m / 3.9 in.- 6.6 ft.
The photo of the flower seems to me photographed within this distance, but without the Macro mode On. I may be wrong, or not.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

It was at absolute minimum focusing distance, in macro mode. Focused manually using the digital 'split prism' manual focus mode. The flowers are about the same size as a penny.

1 upvote
Digitall
By Digitall (Mar 19, 2013)

Ok, thank you Barney to clarify my doubt.

0 upvotes
MrSkelter
By MrSkelter (Mar 19, 2013)

This doesn't look much better than my K-01 with a FA limited lens. More testament to the Pentax than a slight to the Fuji though wow that lens is soft up close with the white flowers.

3 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (Mar 19, 2013)

Although I somewhat agree with you about K-01 with a FA limited lens, they are twice as heavy as this... half price, though.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 19, 2013)

I don't think this is "special" in terms of quality. It's a good APS-C sensor with a good prime on it. There are plenty of other combos that can give similar results. What is special is the form factor and viewfinder and that's what people are excited about.

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Mar 19, 2013)

not to mention that K01 was the worst mirrorless camera in the market, thicker, worst AF, no EVF, and DSLR lenses not designed for mirrorless system.

2 upvotes
fakuryu
By fakuryu (Mar 19, 2013)

@ET2

HAHAHA once again, ignorance is bliss...

2 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Mar 19, 2013)

n/a

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Mar 19, 2013)

I owned an X-100 for just over a year before I sold it. Build quality is excellent. Lens quality is too - as long as your subject is more than a metre away, and you don't want to focus quickly. Ergonomics were so-so, and software was just plain awful - and remained so after several software upgrades.

Because of this, I quickly found myself not using the camera, and it effectively became jewellery. That side of me misses it. My photographic productivity - doesn't.

I don't see enough new in the X-100s to dramatically change any of this. It's an improvement, but only an incremental one.

5 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

Here's a complete list of all 68 improvements the X100S has over the X100. Most of these changes were as a result of the fantastic feedback provided by X100 users.

1. 16-megapixel sensor, up from 12-megapixel
2. X-Trans CMOS II sensor eliminates need for Optical Low Pass Filter
2. The resolution has improved to match Full Frame domain sensors
3. The Signal to Noise ratio improved to be on a par with Full Frame domain sensors
4. Phase detection pixels allow 0.07 sec Auto focus
6. 1080p 60fps full HD movie
7. Improved start-up time. From 2.0sec to 0.9sec
8. Continuous Shooting from 5fps up to 6fps
9. Number of consecutive frames while using Continuous Shooting from 10 frames to 31 frames
10. Improved Shooting Interval from 0.9 seconds down to 0.5 seconds.
11. EXR Processor II Lens Modulation Optimiser reduces diffraction
phenomenon and peripheral aberrations.
12. EXR Processor II features X-Trans processing & new noise reduction.
13. Outputs 14bit RAW files

7 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

14. EVF has a 2.35 mil dot LCD
15. A new protective coating on the surface of the view-finder window prevents fingerprints and smudging.
16. The handling and response on focus ring has been improved.
17. The shooting range of the OVF has been expanded from 80cm-∞ to 50cm-∞
18. The world’s first MF system ‘Digital Split Image’. It uses the phase detection to show accurate focus peaking.
See demo: http://youtu.be/_fJDX1hzUIg
19. ‘Focus Peak Highlight’ function helps you to check the focal plane.
See demo: http://youtu.be/PMdQpgOzd4o
20. In Movie Shooting, it is possible to choose 3 kinds of focusing modes
MF/ AF-C and AF-S.
21. Expanded AF shooting range from 40cm – infinity (X100) to 21cm – infinity (X100S). *not on Macro mode
22. Quick (Q) Button for speed and instant access to shooting menus.
23. Multi Tab Menu easy and fast navigation
24. Two new Film simulation functions added: Pro Neg.Std and Pro Neg. Hi

5 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

25. ‘F-simulation bracketing’ function - one shot can produce 3 different Film Simulation images which can be pre-set.
26. ‘Advanced filter’ mode
27. ‘Multi Exposure’ function. While viewing your first shot on EVF or LCD as overlay, you can shoot a second shot.
28. ‘Shutter Counter’ counts every 100 shots.
29. The shape of viewfinder window changed to help prevent dust build-up
30. The strap attachment rings are double coated with stainless-steel layer
31. Improved the shape of ‘Viewfinder lever’
32. Improved the layout of ‘Focus lever’ (goes MF > AF-C > AF-S now)
33. Improved the operability of the ‘MENU/OK button’
34. Improved shape of the ‘Q button’ (was previously the RAW button)
35. Improved the shape of ‘Front Ring’
36. Improved the torque of ‘Exposure dial’
37. Improved layout of ‘Shutter speed dial’
38. Improved the design of Battery-chamber
39. Improved the shape of Hot shoe
40. Max ISO from 3200 to 6400 *ISO AUTO Mode
41. WB shift available in any mode

4 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

42. Variation of aspect ratio 3:2, 16:9, and 1:1
43. Improved functionality in MF mode
44. Able to reset the setting separately
45. No formatting on the setting when updating FW
46. Change the default LCD information setting -> standard
47. Reset function added for every custom mode
48. Information of all F-simulation modes
49. Add ‘MARK FOR UPLOAD TO’ MyFinePix.com
50. Support ‘Eyefi Connected’
51. Holding Q-button is short-cut function
52. Remove ‘ISO AUTO’ to Shooting Menu
53. Change the location of ‘AF area select button’
54. Change the sub-function of ‘AF area select button’
55. Change the sub-function of ‘AE button’
56. Add the sub-function of ‘Fn button’

5 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

57. In Playback mode, add the ‘Information function’
58. In low light scene, LCD display becomes smooth.
59. After release the shutter button, immediately switch to playback mode.
60. After release the shutter button, could immediately use some key.
61. After bracket shooting,immediately switch to palyback mode.
62. When holding shutter button, LCD doesn’t freeze.
63. Support the SD-card used Macintosh.
64. In low EV scene, the exposure of LCD will adapt.
65. In Manual Exposure, the histogram will adapt.
66. In Post-viewing, eye sensor function can work
67. Support external microphone and electric release.
68. Change the information of setting external Flash

5 upvotes
chooflaki
By chooflaki (Mar 19, 2013)

I still think my X100 ought two years ago is a great camera. This update looks awesome.

1 upvote
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 19, 2013)

@rjx: why repeating these points, where half of them is marketing BS. XTrans 16Mp picture lags behind Bayer 16Mp, I shew it a number of times with imagingresource pictures: no one have succeeded getting higher resolution with XTrans than I did with NEX-5n yet, and they won't: it's easier to get higher resolution with less color artifacts with bayer CFA.

2 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

@Emacs23

Why do people obsess about resolution. It doesn't make better pictures. Today, resolution is pretty irrelevant and most camera have more resolution than MOST people require. As a comparison, some years ago, a professional photography magazine said "Six megapixels is enough for an A3 spread in a magazine".

Obsessed.

3 upvotes
Silvarum
By Silvarum (Mar 19, 2013)

Emacs23,
Non-Bayer CFA produce more color artifacts only because software companies don't want to support them. If you use in-camera RAW converter there will not be any artifacts.
And Bayer CFA is nowhere near perfect, just most-used and most-studied (which also means there's probably not much left to improve in software interpolation).

1 upvote
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 20, 2013)

@Silvarum
go at http://ipol.im and see demosaic section
it's actually even harder to get proper microdetails with xtrans due to lowered blue and red resolution, so you don't hope for better algorithms in the future — the bayer will be ahead (and, of course, multilayer tech with close to 0 lightloss is impatiently awaited — this, not that xtrans crap, will be the real breakthrough.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 20, 2013)

@Wye Photography
Next time, when I will show the xtrans practically has no benefit at high ISO other than lower computational complexity of NR algorithms, will you state "photography is not about low noise at high iso"? Sure, photography is not about technical performance. But photo gears are all about: more resolution, better _real_ high ISO performance, faster focusing. Period.

0 upvotes
Silvarum
By Silvarum (Mar 21, 2013)

@Emacs23
Xtrans does have slightly less red and blue resolution indeed, but it also has all 3 colors on each row, not 2 like in Bayer CFA. So far I've seen, X-Trans produced much (technically) better results than other APS-C sized sensors.
Though I totally agree with you on the awaited multilayer tech.

0 upvotes
TonyinJapan
By TonyinJapan (Mar 19, 2013)

Mmmm, is the X100 series known to be not so sharp when shot wide-open at f2.0? Looking a the white flower pic (DSCF0166), it has a hazy glaze over the whole shot – even in the centre where I guess the main focus should be. Is this the norm for the lens when shot wide-open?

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

Not wide open, as such. It's very hazy at its minimum focus distance. The X100 is the same.

0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Mar 19, 2013)

Yes, the X100 was (is) terrible wide open at macro distances, you need to go down to at least f/4 for it to get acceptable (and even that can be iffy).

0 upvotes
Corwin Lee
By Corwin Lee (Mar 19, 2013)

It look like nothing in focus, is it beyond the min focus distance?

0 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (Mar 19, 2013)

The lens is very soft wide open at close distances (i.e in macro mode), to the extent that Fujifilm actually advises against using these settings in the manual. It sharpens up substantially at F4, and is critically sharp by F8. At 'portrait' distances (1-2m) it's still a little soft at F2 (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), and at longer distances it's impressively sharp.

You can read more about this in our X100 review, in which we show how it performs across the aperture range both at distance and (on the next page) at minimum focus. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmx100/15

2 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Mar 19, 2013)

The main problem I have when shooting at wide apertures is that if you move after focussing you can think you end up with a soft photo. Often, you are just NOT aware that you have moved. Even a few mm will do it. At f4 I find the sharpness more than satisfactory. It's OK wide open, and not really noticeable in small prints/images.

0 upvotes
hexxthalion
By hexxthalion (Mar 19, 2013)

why would you shoot macro at f/2 anyway??

0 upvotes
digby dart
By digby dart (Mar 19, 2013)

Some really nice frames in these samples. Given the price, performance and build this little camera is extraordinary - I love the 'look' of the photographs from these x-trans sensors. Fuji is on a roll.

2 upvotes
vFunct
By vFunct (Mar 19, 2013)

Basically gorgeous... I only wish it was as small as the Nikon A.

0 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (Mar 19, 2013)

The Nikon A should be quite close. It won't have a viewfinder, or f below 2.8, but at 2.8 or above it should do just fine. I'm putting a $200 glass Voightlander viewfinder on it. If the Nikon A low light VF is adequate, it will be a truly portable dream.

0 upvotes
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Mar 19, 2013)

Having handled the X-100 I am glad it is no smaller. I find the size to be the lower limit of comfort for me.

1 upvote
vkphoto
By vkphoto (Mar 19, 2013)

Subtitle typo: "Fujifilm X100 Real-world Samples Gallery". Should be X100s
Photos look good.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

Fixed, thanks for spotting that.

0 upvotes
digby dart
By digby dart (Mar 19, 2013)

Photo's look excellent here, I found myself saying 'that's gorgeous' heaps of times, well done Barney.

4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Mar 19, 2013)

Thanks! I appreciate the kind words.

2 upvotes
Pat Cullinan Jr
By Pat Cullinan Jr (Mar 21, 2013)

More macro photos of nematodes, please.

0 upvotes
maxnoy
By maxnoy (Mar 19, 2013)

High ISO looks pretty amazing, they struck a nice balance with the sensor and the NR settings for most people. Low ISO is a bit weird, though, isn't it? There is that watercolor effect that's completely unexpected when the sensor is that good at higher ISOs. Strange.

4 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Mar 19, 2013)

If you need a not that too costly 'pocket' sized camera with excellent images (always great skin tones) right out of the box, I think it's hard to beat the Fuji X100S at the moment.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 19, 2013)

The X100s images Mike Kobal made should answer all the pointless arguments below about "Fujifilm rendering". Great stuff, awesome camera.

http://www.mikekobal.com/blog/?p=7114

9 upvotes
Daniel from Bavaria
By Daniel from Bavaria (Mar 19, 2013)

They look great and I loved my X100, but now I will hold my breath for the 1.4 23 for my X-Pro1. I will not buy another camera, no! I won't buy another camera ..... no, I will not! Still, what a nice camera.... !nope!

5 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Mar 19, 2013)

23mm f1.4 will probably cost almost as much as a x100s anyway!

2 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Mar 19, 2013)

High ISO comparison between the Fuji X100S, Sony RX1, Leica M 240
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/x100shighbike.jpg
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/rx1highbikes.jpg
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/m240highbike.jpg

Sony RX1 + OVF = $3396
Sony RX1 + EVF = $3246
Leica M 240 = $6950
Fuji X100S = $1299

Nikon Coolpix A $1,096.95
Nikon DF-CP1 OPTICAL VIEWFINDER $379
Total $1475.65

Fuji X100S w/ hybrid viewfinder & hybrid auto focus & split image manual focus & focus peaking & F2 lens & X-Trans sensor. $1299

Sony RX1 vs Fujifilm X100s: side by side comparison
http://www.mikekobal.com/blog/?p=7208

^^^ Demonstrates the X100S having slightly faster auto focus than RX1

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Hannu108
By Hannu108 (Mar 20, 2013)

X100S seems to keep noise in control very well and still there is plenty of details left. Great IQ!

0 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Mar 19, 2013)

so how good or bad is it in real life?
how does it compare to the Sony RX1 at highISO?

0 upvotes
EricWN
By EricWN (Mar 19, 2013)

Aren't these totally different cameras? The Sony is a 3000$ P&S without integrated viewfinder (shows the focus on photo enthusiast, right). Isn't a Leica X2 a more suitable comparison?

The only thing the mentioned cameras have in common is they are kind of on the smaller side.

1 upvote
Len5742
By Len5742 (Mar 19, 2013)

When view the downloaded original of the first picture, I see moire in her jacket. It's not there in the slideshow version. I just got a U2412M a couple of days ago, so I'm wondering if there's something amiss with my monitor?

0 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Mar 19, 2013)

I see that too.

0 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Mar 19, 2013)

Nothing wrong with your monitor

0 upvotes
Total comments: 205
12