Fujifilm X100S Review: Digital Photography Review

Performance

Performance improvements compared to X100

The X100S's new sensor and processor add up to improved performance specs compared to the X100. Here's Fujifilm's own comparison between the two:

Improved AF speed: 0.07 sec in good light (10EV), compared to 0.22 sec for X100
Quicker startup (0.9 sec vs 2 sec)
Faster continuous shooting (6 fps vs 5 fps)
Substantially larger buffer, 31 frames vs 10 frames (JPEG Large/Fine)
Improved shot-to-shot time in single shot drive mode (0.5 sec vs 0.9 sec)
Can immediately switch to playback mode after shooting (no need to wait for file to write to card)
Buttons that were unresponsive immediately after shooting are now fixed

Overall Performance

When it comes to performance, the first thing you'll notice when picking up an X100S after using its predecessor is the speed of the newer camera. Fujifilm isn't lying in the list provided above. For starters (literally) the X100S is ready to take pictures within a second of turning it on, compared to about two-and-a-half seconds in the case of the X100. This alone contributes greatly to a sense of responsiveness.

	The X100S is in most respects a pleasantly responsive camera, although the 'long press' of the shutter button (~1 second) to wake it up from sleep can take some getting used to.

One lingering (albeit relatively minor) frustration though is that the X100S can still take a while to reactivate from auto-power down following a half-press of the shutter button (it can't be 'woken' by any of the other controls). A gentle tap isn't enough - you have to hold the shutter button in its half-press position for a long moment, and the camera will wake up within a second or so of initiating the press. This is fine (we'd prefer an instant response, but one second isn't so bad) but it takes a while to get used to the 'long press'. Even after long experience with the X100, we still find ourselves jabbing at the X100S's shutter, on occasion, trying to get it to come to life.

Continuous Shooting and Buffering

We're very pleased to see that the X100S has not inherited the X100's habit of locking up the camera functions completely while images are being written to its memory card. In the X100S, with a UHS-I card installed, shot-to-shot time is negligible, and to all intents and purposes it is limited only by the speed of AF acquisition. Even after shooting a continuous burst of Raw images, you can still adjust whatever setting you want while the buffer is being cleared. This is true in single and continuous capture modes.

The X100S has a choice of two continuous drive speeds, labeled 3 and 6 fps. Our measurements show both stated rates are spot-on. The camera's buffer is pretty impressive, allowing unlimited shooting in JPEG mode at 3fps (you can just keep your finger held down until the card is full). In Raw mode, you get 3fps for eight shots, before the frame rate slows to around one frame every 1.5 seconds. In its maximum speed 6fps continuous shooting mode the X100S can - again - shoot indefinitely in JPEG (Fine) mode, and for around 8 frames in Raw mode before slowing to around one frame every two seconds. For a camera of this type, where sports and action photography is really unlikely to be a serious priority for most users, these figures represent good performance.

Less worthy of praise is the X100S's behavior when storing and playing back continuously-captured images. In image review mode the X100S displays the 'burst' of shots in a bizarre little rapid slideshow on-screen. You can stop this (and you will want to stop it) by hitting the down button on the 4-way controller, at which point you can scroll through and magnify the individual exposures exactly as you'd expect to be able to. Presumably, this made sense to someone at Fujifilm, at some point.

One final note on continuous shooting - live view is disabled in both 3fps or 6fps continuous shooting modes if you're using the LCD/EVF. Naturally, if you choose to compose images using the optical finder, viewing is uninterrupted (at least until you blink).

3fps Continuous Shooting *

File format	Buffer	Write Time
Large / Fine JPEG	Unlimited	N/A
RAW	8 frames	13 seconds
RAW + LF JPEG	8 frames	13 seconds

6fps Continuous Shooting

File format	Buffer	Write Time
Large / Fine JPEG	Unlimited	N/A
RAW	8 frames	13 seconds
RAW + LF JPEG	8 frames	13 seconds

* UHS-I - SanDisk Extreme Pro 45MB/s Class 1 UHS-I

Autofocus speed / accuracy

Fujifilm claims that the X100S's focus speed has been greatly improved (in favorable conditions) compared to the X100, and this is borne-out in our testing. Outdoors, the X100's focus speed was fine - not outstanding, but basically fine most of the time - and the X100S is roughly twice as fast in good light, where its phase-detection AF pixels can make the most difference. In our testing, the average time from initiating autofocus to image capture hovers around 0.3 seconds for the X100S, and approximately 0.7 seconds for the X100. In low-ish indoor light, the difference is less noticeable and in this sort of environment, AF speed is pretty much the same from both models, at around 0.7 seconds. This is true regardless of the position of either camera's AF point.

	The X100S is far less prone to focus failures than the X100, but every now and then, the camera does get confused and fails to achieve AF lock. This is usually an issue in poor light but from time to time it can also happen in broad daylight. To focus this shot, I had to move the AF point to various areas around the plane's nose until I got a 'lock'.
	I expected this scene to be trickier for the X100S, and indeed it took several attempts before I could get the camera to 'lock' onto the face of my partly-backlit subject (I had more success with the portrait of the young girl, below) One of the minor frustrations of working with the X100S is that in single-shot drive mode, focus needs to be re-acquired after every shot. So if you want to take a number of pictures of the same scene (good practise for portraits) you'll need to re-focus each one. You can get around this by engaging the X100S's continuous drive modes, use manual focus or by holding down the AFL button after AF has been acquired (it's a bit awkward but perfectly manageable).

The X100S is far less prone to focus failures than the X100, but every now and then, the camera does get confused and fails to achieve AF lock. This is usually an issue in poor light but from time to time it can also happen in broad daylight. To focus this shot, I had to move the AF point to various areas around the plane's nose until I got a 'lock'.

I expected this scene to be trickier for the X100S, and indeed it took several attempts before I could get the camera to 'lock' onto the face of my partly-backlit subject (I had more success with the portrait of the young girl, below)

One of the minor frustrations of working with the X100S is that in single-shot drive mode, focus needs to be re-acquired after every shot. So if you want to take a number of pictures of the same scene (good practise for portraits) you'll need to re-focus each one.

You can get around this by engaging the X100S's continuous drive modes, use manual focus or by holding down the AFL button after AF has been acquired (it's a bit awkward but perfectly manageable).

In theory, for best AF performance the X100S needs to be put into its 'high performance' mode, which you can find in the power management section of the set-up menu. In practise, we could not measure any consistent difference in AF speed in this mode compared to default settings.

Where the X100S's AF is very clearly more capable than the X100 is at close focusing distances. The X100S had a minimum focus distance in (non-macro) AF-S mode of 43cm, and this has been halved in the X100S. In practise, what this means is that if you're coming from the X100 you'll find yourself needing to switch to macro mode less when shooting everyday subjects (like close-range portraits of kids) with the X100S. The X100S also seems much less 'fussy' about AF when approaching the limit of its focus range. Both cameras have an absolute minimum focus distance of 10cm in macro mode.

	This is the kind of shot that we'd have really struggled to get with the X100 - a low (ish) contrast subject, backlit and pretty close to the camera. The X100S had no problem hitting accurate focus. Close-range portraiture is a positive joy with the X100S, compared to its predecessor.

Compared to peers like the Ricoh GR and Nikon Coolpix A, the X100S's AF performance is on a par, but not noticeably faster either indoors or outside in the sun. In terms of speed It's still roundly bested by the fastest contrast-detection AF systems inside newer M43 models from Panasonic and Olympus, but in general use there's nothing much to complain about beyond very occasional hiccups.

Oddly, like its predecessor, the X100S has no face detection autofocus system. This was disappointing two years ago, but is even more so now that the feature has become almost ubiquitous in mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras, and indeed DSLRs/SLTs. This omission is particularly odd as Fujifilm was one of the very first manufacturers to introduce the technology, even applying the 'fd' suffix to several models right back at its infancy in 2006. The X100S's little brother, the X-M1 has face detection, as does the X20, and from various conversations with engineers, Fujifilm seems to believe that the feature is not appropriate for 'high-end' models - a decision we think photographers would prefer to make themselves.

Perhaps Fujifilm thinks that that the X100S's target user base should be sufficiently well-versed in the use of off-center focus points and focus-recompose techniques not to need such a crutch. The problem with this argument, though, is that face detection has been improved and refined to such an extent that it's now a genuinely useful photographic tool on many of the X100S's competitors. Interestingly, the X100S can recognise faces (sort of) in captured images when you apply red-eye reduction to portraits. Ho hum.

Battery life

The X100S uses Fujifilm's venerable NP-95 battery, the same as we saw in X100 and before that, the company's 'Real 3D' compacts and the FinePix F30/F31fd. Unfortunately in the much larger-sensor X100S it can't match the prodigious lifespan it offered in with these legendary compacts. As always, battery life is highly dependent upon how much you use the rear LCD: with mixed viewfinder usage and image review on the LCD we routinely got a couple of hundred shots, but this could undoubtedly be stretched substantially further if you only use the optical finder. Note too that shooting movies will greatly reduce battery life.

The camera's battery level meter isn't a huge amount of help - there's only two steps below 'full', and the dreaded red 'exhausted' often follows 'part-empty' after just a few shots.

	The X100S comes with the same battery and charger as the X100, with one very small change. The X100's battery charger came with a small plastic insert, separate in the box, to shim the NP-95 battery to sit against the contacts snugly. This popped off with little provocation, and was easily lost. With the X100S, Fujifilm is bundling the same charger, with the same insert (visible on the lower-right corner of the charger) but now it's glued on. Hooray!

The X100S comes with the same battery and charger as the X100, with one very small change. The X100's battery charger came with a small plastic insert, separate in the box, to shim the NP-95 battery to sit against the contacts snugly. This popped off with little provocation, and was easily lost. With the X100S, Fujifilm is bundling the same charger, with the same insert (visible on the lower-right corner of the charger) but now it's glued on. Hooray!

If you mainly shoot with the optical finder you can turn on 'OVF power save mode', which promises to increase battery life by not continually reading data out from the sensor. The data display and framelines are a little dimmer in this mode and the live histogram is no longer available - instead the X100S shows a sad, empty box in its place. If you mainly shoot in manual mode, the live histogram isn't very useful anyway, so turning OVF power save on is worth considering; however in other exposure modes the histogram is a sufficiently useful that we'd be inclined to keep it at the expense of battery life.

GearShop

Fujifilm X100S Compact Camera●

Buy on GearShop

Fujifilm X100S 16 MP Digital Camera with 2.8-Inch LCD (Silver)	Too low to display
Fujifilm X100S 16 MP Digital Camera with 2.8-Inch LCD (Silver)	Too low to display
Fujifilm X20 12 MP Digital Camera with 2.8-Inch LCD (Silver)	$599.00
Fujifilm X100 12.3 MP APS-C CMOS EXR Digital Camera with 23mm Fujinon Lens and 2.8-Inch LCD	$899.00
Fujifilm X-E1 16.3 MP Compact System Digital Camera with 2.8-Inch LCD and 18-55mm Lens (Black)	$999.00
Fujifilm X10 12 MP EXR CMOS Digital Camera with f2.0-f2.8 4x Optical Zoom Lens and 2.8-Inch LCD	$339.00
Fujifilm X100 12.3 MP APS-C CMOS EXR Digital Camera with 23mm Fujinon Lens and 2.8-Inch LCD (Special Edition - Black)	$1,099.00
Fujifilm X20 12 MP Digital Camera with 2.8-Inch LCD (Black)	$599.00
Fujifilm FinePix S4200 Digital Camera	$154.95
Fujifilm X-M1 Compact System 16MP Digital Camera Kit with 16-50mm Lens and 3-Inch LCD Screen (Silver)	$727.98
Fujifilm X-S1 12MP EXR CMOS Digital Camera with Fuijinon F2.8 to F5.6 Telephoto Lens and Ultra-Smooth 26x Manual Zoom (24-624mm)	$629.00

Show all listings (11) ...

Get more prices from Amazon

Comments

Total comments: 445

I am considering the Fuji X100S. I have to rely on professional feedback from unbiased photographers. I used to have a Canon 10D , 20D and 5D as my professional cameras and used a small Powershot S45 as my "point and shoot". I was blown away by the accuracy of the S45 exposure metering system but was always disappointed with the 10D, 20D and 5D. I had to shoot in RAW to get good JPEGS. Highlights were always over-exposed. The point and shoot S45 always gave me good exposures in JPEG's, I never needed to use it in RAW ( it did shoot RAW).
My wedding photographer friend used an Olympus with a sensor that had two types, one for bright light one for normal. Result was no blown out highlights. Ne never used RAW and the JPEGS were always spot on.

My question is: How is the metering system in the X100S and how does the sensor handle contrast ? I don't want to shoot in RAW all the time.

0 upvotes

How do you offer a fixed lens $1200 camera WITHOUT image stabilization? Or are you just saving that for the x100s2?

0 upvotes

come on ^^ who needs image stabilization?

1 upvote

Honestly, those f2 samples are horrible.

1 upvote

Just checking some different cameras on this great widget, and saw something strange. On the Bailey's Irish bottle, on the word Irish, some cameras pick up some mottling and some don't. What would cause that? It seems to happen in both RAW and JPEG.

0 upvotes

I've now had my X100S for about 2 weeks and have been rotating its use w/ my Panny GX1 and Canon 6D. So, I've been able to do some comps of similar shots. Some thoughts: 1st, I note the painfully slow AF in low light conditions. The GX1's AF does very well in low light; I've owned 2 other m4/3 cameras and they have also had a pretty fast AF.

2) the incredibly noisy images at ISO 3200 and above.

3) the images appear very soft at f2 in low light.

That said, I really enjoy the X100S. I've overcome the slow AF and soft image quality (in part) by switching to manual focus. The manual focus ring is very responsive. I feel like it's just a matter of time/use before I get better at manual focusing.

The ISO problem, however, remains. Is it for daylight/bright interiors only?

The shutter is quiet. The only thing quieter would be an e-shutter or the shutter on the Sony RX1/100. This is the best feature of the camera.

And, it is extremely low profile (fits in my bag easily).

2 upvotes

Again another camera that is not CanNik brand and all I can read about, great sensor, color etc but FUNCTIONALITY, the basic mechanic yet again is a failure.How long it would take them (Fuji,Sony,Olyimpus,Panasonic) to come up with product that will not fail within first year? I am not saying that 2 major players did not have horrible cameras on the market but in a much less percentage that all others...I am still waiting for decent compact camera.

1 upvote

What are you talking about? What a moronic post.

4 upvotes

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

2 upvotes

What I noticed see if you morons that called me moron and you can suck my balls (sorry DP) ,if you do read posts below not just read last ones, you will realize that these cameras were not without issues in terms of failure of some kind...so they do develop problems and Issues.From black orbs to jamms for which you need to send your camera for repairs.So before you insult me, hiding in your moms basement, think what I would do to your face if I was insulted in person.

0 upvotes

Ever heard of the olympus micro four thirds series? and the panasonic micro four thirds as well? oh and the sony rx 100?
Someone is a fanboy.

0 upvotes

And srados nobody called you a moron, but you proved that you are one, congratulations.

1 upvote

I'm considering either the X100s or the X20 for casual portraiture with bokeh. Thoughts?

0 upvotes

I really like it for portraiture. I find though that, even wide open, f2 isn't going to give you that really shallow bokeh effect. It still looks nice, but if that's your angle, get an XPro1 and the new 23mm f1.4

0 upvotes

both are starnge cameras for portrait work

not so the bokeh but the angle^^ a 35 as a portrait lens is very close

edit i know the x20 is a zoom, but i wouldnt even consider that camera for even semipro work

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

nice review.
I have used the X100S and the RX1, both the best 35mm walkabouts at the moment. Both are truely excelelnt and its a matter of personal taste. The main advantage of the RX1 is the sheer cascade of detail. The main advantage of the Fuji is colours and price.
Look and handling is really up to the individual.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I used my Fuji X100s mostly as a "MONOCHROME" camera,
the X-Trans sensor is excellent for B&W.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See some exemples : http://my-finepix-x100s.blogspot.com

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 32 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

i like the pictures, but the 1995 backround image is horrible. made my ipad browser crash 3times

0 upvotes

I received my X100S 4 weeks ago (love the camera) and today I noticed that the viewfinder curtain is stuck. So it is not possible to switch between the Ovf and Evf. It has nothing to do with the macro mode as it is stuck halfway up. Is there anyone that had simular problem?

0 upvotes

Linus,
I had the same problem with my x100 blck lim edit,
seems to be a known problem with some kind of "finger" losing the contact with the curtain.
Send to Fuji and repaired w/o problems.

0 upvotes

I have sent my camera to Fuji for service, good to hear that they manage to solve the problem.

0 upvotes

LOL,
still no images with the new test chart that compares lens performance.

Barney, I thought you said that there was extensive testing on this camera and the new test chart images would be following closely.

Don't mean to beat a dead horse, but your review and rating is suspect until you compare lens performance against the other competitors, especially since they were compared to each other in their reviews.

What gives???

0 upvotes

I found the AF on the original X100 to be painfully slow and so never bought one.

I take it things are improved in the AF speed department with this new s model?

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

The latest firmware upgrades have worked wonders on the X100. AF is much improved. I have the X100, love it, and will not be getting the X100s.

0 upvotes

Is the focus peaking working in the video mode?

0 upvotes

I haven't upgraded my DSLR in years. I own a Canon 5D (original 5D) and it still works wonderfully. If I upgrade it will only be to a used markII, beacause of my budget. But for around the same price I could get the x100s which I would love to have. Unsure whether to upgrade my DSLR or just buy the x100s. Any advice?

1 upvote

Coming from Canon 5D, in my opinion based on previously owning an xe1, you would not be happy. Raw file processing is a drag and the image quality, especially in mixed lighting will yield image quality that will disappoint. I have 2 5dmiis for work and wanted the xe1 as my grab and go.... i was disappointed to sah the least. Gram the eos m and the pancake lens and the ef adapter. The images are outstanding and the video is excellent.

2 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

Keep you dslr for occations you need high speed and telephoto and buy the Fuji x100s. You will be happy with it and you will bring it with you all the time and get superb shots. This has been my choice and I am happy with it. You wont miss the size and the weight of you dslr and you will be surprised how this fixed lens camera fits into most situations. The x100s is a wonderful camera (which also means my dslr stays at home except for special occations).

0 upvotes

No Brainer. I have had my 5D mk1 for about 4 years now and 2.5 years ago bought the X100. The 5D does give richer files but the X100 is a little wonder in it's own right. Only real advantage of MkII is more MP but that means bigger files. I say keep the MK 1 (like me) and get the X100s. After a bit of adapting you will be glad you did. Handheld night photography anyone? (but best to have af on af-c). Shoots really good jpgs but I now shoot mainly in Raw ( as with all my cameras).

0 upvotes

Overexposed galore for the gallery!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

Just chiming in that in order to get really nice colors in a Lightroom RAW workflow (similar to what you get in Apple's Aperture), you should make your own X100S DNG camera profile.

If you don't have access to a color checker chart you can download my X100S camera profile and see if it makes any difference: http://fredrikaverpil.tumblr.com/post/53053979867

2 upvotes

Where is NX300 review???

1 upvote

Stupids like you are expected to ask stupid question like this..!!! Not your fault buddy..!!

1 upvote

if there's one thing i wish fujifilm would tweak for the x100s it would be to extend the shadow dynamic range. i always feel there is a fight to prevent clipping blacks, tweaking in post to raise shadows and lower contrast, and somewhat distorting the natural feel of the image

the dynamic range of the original x100 is incredible, the shadow dynamic range is almost 3 stops extended over the x100s, in the s-s mode. now i know why x100 images can look so soft and natural

in the end i'll probably have to just work with a more limited dynamic range, or shoot RAW since RAW images tend to look a lot less clipped in the blacks, but it would be nice if fujifilm could extend shadow DR to levels similar to XE-1

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

Why don't you just reduce the shadow tones in camera? I shoot with both shadow and high tones set to -1 to give a flatter image and then adjust them in post with a little extra contrast to my taste rather than the camera's.

1 upvote

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

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

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.

1 upvote

ok, sure. i don't know what that has to do with the change in shadow dynamic range but whatever. i've always thought x100 jpgs were pretty amazing

0 upvotes

I pull lots out of the dark end of my Fuji X-E1 Perhaps you are not getting enough exposure, it's the only reason I can think that you might find the Fuji black end clipped, whatever that means.

0 upvotes

Hey where did my post go? I replied to a poster who had questioned the testing method of the X100S in relation to the Nikon A and Ricoh GR and thus the scoring between cameras reviewed.

My reply was something along the lines of; I noticed in the review that dpreview called the Nikon A and Ricoh GR "pretenders" and wondered if dpreview worked a sweet resellers deal with Fuji in order to sell the X100S in the dpreview GearShop.

I must have struck a nerve and considering the very real trust issues dpreview is having with members concerning the GearShop and it's relation to honest reviews going forward I shouldn't be surprised they chose to axe my post.

Hard to be objective, honest and transparent when chasing the almighty dollar.

5 upvotes

I believe the use of the term pretender is not meant to be perjorative here. More in the understanding of laying claim to be King. "Pretender to the Crown"

0 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

I don't see how the new Gear Shop has anything to do with anything. You say that DPR can't be "honest and transparent chasing the almighty dollar" because of the Gear Shop? Funny thing is, DPR has been owned by Amazon since 2007. Guess they've just been fudging reviews to push sales there all along but no one ever noticed.

1 upvote

Don´t worry Barnaby . Yes it took time but We like the review ! :D

3 upvotes

"Jpeg rules. RAW is for posers."

Johnsonj's post is meaningless. It only illustrates his ignorance about the advantages of shooting RAW vs. JPEG.

A knowledgeable photographer will be aware of the advantages/disadvantages of both RAW and JPEG and will select the image file format based on the situation and his/her particular requirements.

Good easily-understandable explanations of the advantages of RAW vs. JPEG can be found at http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml and http://bythom.com/qadraw.htm.

4 upvotes

I own the X100S and a Canon 5D3. The X100S has all but replaced my 5D3 for family outings and candids. It's a wonderful camera with wonderful IQ. If you understand the need for an aperture ring and a shutter speed dial, and being your own judge of exposure, you understand this camera. If you don't, you don't. The only other manufacturer who understands this market segment is Leica. The Gold Award is well deserved.

5 upvotes

Any $100-200 compact point & shoot with manual mode can adjust aperture and shutter speed quick enough. Rotate dial, hit one button, rotate dial again. Aperture ring is a bonus sure enough but romance how important it is - not realistic.

4 upvotes

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!

1 upvote

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.

2 upvotes

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 :)

2 upvotes

it's interesting how such a simple thing as a design oriented towards immediate manual control and operation can sell a few hundred thousand $1200 fixed lens cameras.

i cannot logically justify the price, i'm just a wannabe i know, but using it just makes me feel good!

0 upvotes

You definitely won't ever need to use RAW with this camera. The RAW mode is already cooked just as much as the jpg mode. I don't see that as a plus though.

When I don't intend to edit the image at all I use jpg. When I want to edit the image I want all of the data to be there and that is not possible in RAW mode with this camera.

How in the world could you describe this as a serious professional camera. It basically doesn't have RAW? If Nikon or Canon did this everyone would be complaining majorly.

5 upvotes

I shoot in Raw + Jpg constantly. Typically shoot b&w jpg or velvia and can easily just use the jpg ooc. However, sometimes I blow the highlights or do some other silly things and having the RAW allows me to recover it wonderfully. Not using raw seems odd to me - it's the best way for me to ensure I don't screw up a shot I really don't want to screw up.

I mean just look at the file sizes - one obviously has a lot more in it than the other...

1 upvote

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.

1 upvote

I'm a pro sport photographer and depressingly, its true. Many pros only shoot JPG.

I shoot RAW+JPG on the D4, putting RAW on the XQD card and JPG on the CF. If I desperately need an image immediately for web use, I use the JPG. For print I always use the RAW file. Works like a charm. And I have a contract to supply a sport's hall of fame gallery because nobody else has high enough quality files - so long may people's laziness/stupidity continue.

0 upvotes

Thank you Mr. Swarbrick for your useful comments as a working pro. That is exactly how I use the two cards in my 5dm3, with the SD card set to medium jpeg, mainly just as backup to the RAW file, which really must be processed to get the most out of the photo. 14 bits vs. 8, just so much more leeway for adjustment.

0 upvotes

Isn't In Camera RAW Noise Reduction a beautiful thing? Oh wait, you can't get that data back if you want it? Ok, never mind.

6 upvotes

I don't understand this - if I process from RAW the level of detail is astounding.

0 upvotes

@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.

3 upvotes

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.

4 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

@mpgxsvcd actually that's incorrect. No noise reduction is applied to RAW. If you process in camera or through ACR/LR you'll see what looks like loss of detail due to noise reduction. That doesn't happen if you use other RAW converters. See some links to images I processed through aperture below...

3 upvotes

At base ISO I really couldn't see how this camera had any better image quality than the Olympus OMD. If you stick the excellent Panasonic 20mm F1.7 lens on the Olympus or the upcoming Panasonic GX7 you would have the same image quality(or Better) for about the same price.

The biggest difference is that you could also then have an interchangeable lens camera. I don't think that the X100S is a bad camera. I just think that the fixed lens compact category offers no benefit over an interchangeable lens compact camera.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting

4 upvotes

Does the EM-5 or GX7 sync the flash up to 1/2000s?

5 upvotes

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

6 upvotes

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

2 upvotes

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.

2 upvotes

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

3 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

Sure, they could use F1.4 but the price would be doubled. I own both x100s and OMD. While I love them both, I can strongly vouch for the image quality of the X100s to be better than OMD with any lens. OMD images are slightly clearer but where it looses is the Color matrix and the dynamic range. X100s has that silky smooth pleasing look that is just absent from OMD.

0 upvotes

@mpgxsvcd : are you sure you got the concept of a fixed lens camera, or should this be somehow sarcastic ? ^^

also i think you didnt get the concept of the x100 at all

0 upvotes

It looks like a good camera in a niche market. If you are shopping for a camera in this market I am sure you would give this camera a nice long look.

That is pretty much the definition of the Gold award. I camera that excels in its particular category. If they only gave the gold awards to the absolute best performing cameras then the only cameras that would get the gold awards would be ones that most of us couldn't afford.

I would never buy this camera because I need a lot more flexibility than it can offer. However, I definitely would recommend that other people who need this particular type of camera look at it.

1 upvote

why do you explane it over and over again ? you wont buy it .. end of story ^^

0 upvotes

Seems to be a lot of conversation about the "Gold Award" status. Through the reviews here you can learn a great deal about various cameras. My personal belief is the various ratings are meaningless. This site has one underlying principal and that is commerce. Without it the site would not be supporting itself. Read the conclusion again if you think otherwise.

Seems like a nice camera, I won't be buying it I have five cameras already.

0 upvotes

Ι find it extremely difficult to see the use of these cams anyway...
All these about street photography which needs some peculiar cams is IMO rather a philology.
Street photography as a term/art does not need a certain cam with certain abilities or whatsoever, just something handy and reliable, top IQ is not its main quest.
The only positive thing in these cams is that they explore miniaturization.

1 upvote

Ya... completely agree with you.. I find the mobile camera best for capturing street (if considering the size) but if things like AF speed, image quality and controls come - the mobile cannot do well and heres where this kinda device is more handy than a Bulky gadget which makes your subject more aware and you have to carry weight all the time. taking out and making a DSLR ready also takes time and grabs others attention, so for that this kind of device or even a mobile is better for capturing street and candid

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Cameras actually DO need certain features for optimal street. Prefocus abilities, auto low limits for shutter speeds, bigger than the frame viewfinders, etc. Many street photographers find one or more of these mandatory for their process. You will be surprised how many otherwise excellent and ergonomic cameras can't be prefocused which makes them useless for hip or waist level shooting.

0 upvotes

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?

1 upvote

Take the Sony NEX series as an example. There are NO distance scales on the E-mount lenses, not even on the Zeiss e-mount lenses. And there is NO electronic distance scale in software (Fuji's do have one). This means you can't set focus to a predetermined distance, a feature which is needed for shooting without looking at the screen or through the viewfinder, i. e. for waist or hip shooting. Manual focus is not the same as distance pre-focus. Manual focus can't help you if you are not looking thorugh the viewfinder/screen.

The only way to use a NEX camera as a zone focus camera is to use adapted lenses with distance scales on them.

0 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

And in the X100s Zone in focus is visible in the Scale on the LCD, it keeps on changing according to the DOF- it actually shows the area in DOF.. which is a great feature to help Zone focusing

0 upvotes

@IchiroCameraGuy:

I don't think you truly understand the problem. You don't have 5 seconds to pre-focus when out on the streets. Distance calibation should be possible to accomplish in a moment, whenever I want, preferably without the need to raise the camera to my face.

Besides, there is not always an object available around you at the required distance so that you use it to AF/manual prefocus. So, on top of raising the camera to eye level, you need to move around to get something in this distance. No, thanks. I'll just stick to manual focus lenses with scales.

0 upvotes

It's a great camera for the street but don't undermine it's ability for anything else that you might like to do. It has a stellar image quality and amazing color matrix only Fuji knows how to produce. Anything you picture with this just looks stunning if you know what you are doing. NEX series doesn't even come close to the quality. I have owned NEX and it pretty much sucked. This is the 1st time the image quality of an APS-C sensor looked better than Full-Frame. I rest my case.

0 upvotes

I just set a good depth of field so I don't have to worry; I know my subject will be in focus. I figured that out when I was a high school yearbook photog and needed candid student shots.

0 upvotes

the advertising is the engine of sales. DPREVIEW helps to their owners to sale cameras. no any problem, just business.

0 upvotes

Their are more "CONS" listed here than their are in Pelican Bay Prison. And it still gets an 81% + Gold Award. So it has been decided by those in charge, make a "Retro" looking camera and name it Fujifilm and bingo it's a world class winner. I wish I had my Brownie that I got from Kellogg's Corn Flakes box tops. It surely would garner a 83% and don't call me Shirley:-))

6 upvotes

Is that how ratings and awards are calculated or dished outt? Add the pros and cons? Or subtract the cons from the pros? I missed that memo.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting

11 upvotes

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...)

1 upvote

I've had a sony nex, nikon d600 and a canon 60d and I use this camera 5x more than I have any others. To me it's a Gold no doubt. I think there might be a lot of things people think can be better, but the good far outweighs them.

0 upvotes

@chaking. To each his own. I have my arsenal and I'm fond of my Nex 6. Maybe its a bias against Sony, who knows. To me at least I enjoy the noise free stunning photos I get. The AF is accurate and fast. Yes Sony really needs to put more lenses out. I learned the camera with the kit lens (16-50) and now Im using the 35 Prime and the 10-18 much better than the 24 Zeiss. Last if it goes on sale I may go long with the 55-200. Thats it.

0 upvotes

Sorry, that's not how it works. It's very easy to be neat-picky and list things you wish were there or different but what's important is how bad is it. Are the cons earth shattering in the grand scheme of things or they are just good to haves. If it's the latter then the came by virtue of all it's amazing pros deserves to be Gold Awarded.

0 upvotes

i hope this was a sarcastic statement and you all fell for it hehe

otherwise i must be daydreamin ^^

facedetection ???? seriously ?

0 upvotes

So glad a major reviewer finally discussed the lack of face detection in Fuji's "advanced" cameras. I hope Fuji will implement face detection via firmware upgrade in its "advanced" cameras, and/or in its upcoming cameras.

4 upvotes

It's not really an 'idiot mode' kind of camera. Face detect is fine on my iPhone camera, I don't want/need it on my 'real' camera.

5 upvotes

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'?

3 upvotes

Or you could learn how to focus.

0 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

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.

2 upvotes

I always thought that the X100 and the X100S have a built-in face detection routine used (at least) for red eye removal..possibly more!
Manual page 79 ( 75 for the X100)

0 upvotes

Face detect would make a lot of sense given that these on-sensor focus systems have a tendency to back focus from time to time.

0 upvotes

Another good to have feature but not really important. The target market for X100S according to Fujifilm are advanced users and professional photographers. Anybody uses it will just have to know how to shoot right.

0 upvotes

With all the negative points in the conclusion, I find difficult to believe that X100s scored higher than Ricoh GR :o Although, I will admit that the X100s looks prettier in the classic rangefinder appearance :)

0 upvotes

Great review. I have been looking at this for a while, and will be ordering it. A great alternative to the bulk of my Nikon DSLRs for travel, street photography etc

2 upvotes

I have just bought one, I love it. My DSLR will be on ebay some time soon.

0 upvotes

From now on, when people comment, they should say that they own the particular camera or its predecessor so we can then guess whether an opinion response is tainted or not. :)

9 upvotes

By the way thanks Barney ! Great review ! Very detailed and informative !

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Guess what,I bought the X100S right after I read the review XD

3 upvotes

I just reviewed the sample images that Barney took with the original x100. Night and day difference. The x100 images are very good and with good color and detail. X100s is clearly not an award winning camera so why is the dpreview gold being awarded to a jpg snapshot camera that is grossly overpriced?

5 upvotes

They should change the website name to DHReview. LOL.

3 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

30 upvotes

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?

20 upvotes

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.

3 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

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

1 upvote

@ zodiacfml

I realize that the default tone curve is a bit different on my X-Pro1, but I only seem to encounter "bad" blown highlights shooting at the expanded ISO 100. This is effectively "DR50" as it loses a stop of highlight detail vs the native base ISO of 200.

That said, I have no problem shooting at DR200 or DR400 since there really isn't any shadow noise to speak of at ISO 800, as the review mentions.

0 upvotes

Douche.

0 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

yes, it seems most people don't appreciate the subtlety of the quality of rendering from x-trans cameras. dpreview test images from other cameras may show more 'detail' than the x-100s but there is more to an image than seeing details in sharp relief.

with that said, it seems most people on flickr shoot the x100s jpgs with default NR and shadow settings and as a result there are a lot of kind of the water color smeared detail images that x-trans is apt to produce

0 upvotes

Sample shots on dpreview are always run of the mill. I would never go by those. It is an amazing camera with the best color and dynamic range period.

0 upvotes

It's comic the number of people on here who haven't used the camera who are slating it. But then this is the internet... A well deserved result for a great camera with amazing image quality.

6 upvotes

I have owned and used xtrans. Xtrans is horrible.

3 upvotes

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

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting

4 upvotes

Only if you don't know how to process it. Are you seriously suggesting there is anything wrong with these?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/9296275448/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/9196635382/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/9339130632/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/8666783660/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/8664446522/

0 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting

6 upvotes

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

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

3 upvotes

From David's own listing selling his X-E1:

"...takes fantastic images and video."

Hmm...

3 upvotes

Unbelievable. This is the first time I have seen such a terrible review. All of the samples are random snaps most likely in auto or program mode and the results are not matching the conclusion. Another point is that the conclusion pros / cons are of little actual value to the reader. Jpegs are excellent? really. A $1,300 camera that is given a Gold Award no less says excellent jpgs. WOW. and that isn't even correct. I looked closely at every single sample image and they are terrible. Same old issue especially the mushiness. I am beside myself with disbelief that the reviewer has any real experience and knowledge in this field. I am sorry to say this because it's not "nice" but this has to be said.

4 upvotes

Wow. Beside yourself with disbelief? Hyperbole much? All for a camera that you have never touched. Too funny.

15 upvotes

LOL

4 upvotes

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

4 upvotes

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.

17 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

5 upvotes

Im sorry but … Why are you: “hoping to see a posted source of images converted from the recommended third party software listed all over the comments here” when you clearly hate this camera as much as you do ? Its just hard to understand why someone would obsess over an item they consider beneath their skill level ?
I did have to buy Apple’s Aperture since i like the way it handles my files a little more than Lightroom but quite frankly i was more than happy to do so as i just consider it an investment but for some estrange reason that seems to bother you more than me… And mind you not a penny ever came out of your pocket … I just don’t get it

0 upvotes

IchiroCameraGuy... FUD...

Be happy with your EOS-M. Take some pictures. Don't lose the plot...

0 upvotes

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

2 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

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.

2 upvotes

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.

2 upvotes

Way too hard, man...

0 upvotes

Thank you so much, it was very fast...

Wow the results are very exciting!!!

And very funny the photographic apology of Barnaby Britton, but the apology some guys are expecting should be about the no-REVIEWS of Canon EOS-1D X (waiting since 2011) and Nikon D4 (waiting since 2012). If someday those stuff appears, then Barnaby smile will shine twice...

2 upvotes

I bought x100s 6 months ago...i like 35mm (equivalent FF) lens

but...I would like x-pro1 + 23 1.4 instead f2 on x100 les(s)

fastest lens on best x-trans DR in the market

IMHO x100s has no future when this combo (or x-e1 + 23 1.4) will be available

0 upvotes

I may get this camera to help round out my Fuji X system. It is a fine "35mm" lens and can double for a point and shoot.

0 upvotes

Just some editing quibbles: I see several instances of the mistaken mention of the "S" model when you meant the non S model. FYI.

0 upvotes

Looks quite interesting. Low noise, even if sharpness is brought to the same level as competition by unsharp mask:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6371254956/photos/2643723/comparison-fuji?inalbum=pics

Chroma noise is almost absent.

0 upvotes

unsharp mask is called smudging the detail or aggressive noise reduction which is apparent in all of the files from this camera.

0 upvotes

Well, whatever it is, it does reveal some crispness that is buried under Fuji-fog. Here, X100S has been contrast enhanced and US 0.1/~50% in PhotoScape. Other cameras have been kept untouched.

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6371254956/photos/2643836/comparison-fuji3?inalbum=pics

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6371254956/photos/2643837/comparison-fuji2?inalbum=pics

0 upvotes

Nice review. Maybe I missed it, but- it didn't earn any 'pros' for good high iso?

0 upvotes

A gold star ey? For a $1300 camera with lacklustre video performance...mmm no wonder this thread in the forum was locked:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51878415

1 upvote

I suspect most of those interested it this kind of camera camera don't care much about shooting video.

1 upvote

Apology accepted!

0 upvotes

the hype of these x-trans ...seems going to end after this review

too many cons, too many doubts and too many negative Opionons

81% score?...canon eos 100d 78%?

gold award?..silver imho is correct

5 upvotes

There is absolutely nothing stopping you from making your own review website and giving it silver award by yourself.

9 upvotes

Imagine the controversy that would follow by giving this camera a silver award.

1 upvote

OMD EM-5 is look better on the studio comparison. Take, for example word "IRISH" from the scene.

3 upvotes

This is because the EM-5 output from Adobe is quite sharpened by default. X100s Adobe defaults on the contrary is like a watching something via a muddy window.

3 upvotes

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...

2 upvotes

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.

3 upvotes

We irish can be a bit fuzzy at times.

7 upvotes

Barney, what is the FL used for the OMD studio shots? Why DPR don't use same FL for all cameras? FL 35mm is inside all standard zooms.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

You must not have read the reviews conclusion. The Ricoh GR and Nikon A are merely "pretenders". I think dpreviews GearShop must be getting a good resellers deal on the X100s.

2 upvotes

While I can completely understand why dpreview uses a "standardized" process for reviewing products...an industry standard no less in the case of ACR...unfortunately for some products, this truly kills their performance capabilities. The Fuji X Trans cams are such a product.

ACR / LR is quite poor for RAW conversion with the Fuji cams. If you value the DAM capabilities of LR over image quality and want a one app workflow solution, fine, but you are sacrificing a LOT in IQ.

Evidence:
http://www.thevisualexperience.org/web/camera-image-quality-why-dpreview-may-be-sometimes-wrong/

If dpreview gave a score of 81 via ACR, then they will fall in love with the images via Iridient Developer.

Again, I understand dpreview can't spend hours testing numerous raw converters for the best results and it would arguably skew comparisons between products, but in the case of the X trans cams....justice is not being served.

This is why people love the in-camera jpegs vs ACR raws. Well, duh.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

5 upvotes

So, what all are saying is disregard the soft files that are part of the test because this is not indicative of the performance...

Don't other brands perform better with other processors?

Disregard the fact that the test was not performed with the new center to edge sharpness target which was used in the Ricoh Gr and Coolpix A test...

Wouldn't this be a very relevant test based on the stellar performance of the Ricoh GR and Coolpix A?

Disregard the fact that the dynamic range is lower than both the Ricoh GR and the Nikon A (As Barney Britton stated in his review it's more than enough because Fuji said so)...

You don't need to shoot Raw as per Barney Britton because the Jpegs are so good, even though this is not seen in the samples (since when did Ken Rockwell take over DPReview)...

There seems to be a lot of disregarding in this test, in favor of the FujiX100s

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Or maybe just sour grapes?

0 upvotes

Maybe,
but it doesn't change the facts does it?

Hey, if your content with holding a $1200 camera to a lower standard than an $800 camera, that's cool...

3 upvotes

Oh Bamboojled. Not sure what your agenda is here, seems to be mindlessly raging against the Fuji cams. Whatever turns you on dude.

My agenda is this: If using a particular software *dramatically* worsens the final images from *any* camera, I would want to know about it. And the reverse is also true, if using a $75 piece of software (Iridient Developer) would *dramatically* improve the final images from *any* camera, I would want to know.

For comparisons, we can't cripple a product's potential by refusing to use a different RAW converter. If after trying ID with Fuji raws, you still prefer the Ricoh...great. Just don't base your rage and reviewer conspiracies on using ACR for the Fuji images, cuz it sucks.

Proof vs your mindless rants? Here ya go:
http://www.thevisualexperience.org/web/camera-image-quality-why-dpreview-may-be-sometimes-wrong/

If working with X Trans images isn't worth the trouble for you..fine.. no need to unfairly attack those of us to whom it is.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

No agenda,
don't own either Nikon A nor Ricoh Gr.

Interested in all 3, but when stringent testing is done on 2, and not so on the 3rd (Fuji) one has to ask questions, don't they?

When one shows dramatically smudged images that lack detail by comparison to the others, one has to ask questions, especially when the Fuji is rated as good or better than the other 2.

1 upvote

Bam...then stop ignoring the answers and solutions provided to you. It makes you appear quite disingenuous. Fuji x100s didn't get a "free pass" on dpreview or any other review I'm aware of. Stop fabricating delusional conspiracies against Dpreview. Don't like their reviews?... go elsewhere.

0 upvotes

Look, real simple.

If a review supplies images that are completely opposite to what the reviewer is claiming, I'M GOING TO CALL IT AS I SEE IT!

If you feel that the reviewer should have used different software in his review then that is your issue, I AM COMMENTING ON THE REVIEW, THE IMAGES SUPPLIED AND WHAT THE REVIEWER STATES!

The fact that the reviewer didn't say, (The images I have included suck by comparison to the competition, but if you go out and get different software it is much better) speaks volumes to my point and case...I can only comment on what is said and supplied by the reviewer.

There is no conspiracy, nor have I said there was.
What I did do is point out the inconsistencies in the Review.

Namely, crappy smudging of detail at all ISO's in the RAW samples by comparison to the competition.

Lower Dynamic range against the competition, which was said to be no big deal

Lens sharpness and corner resolution not tested with new test chart, even though this test was used on the Ricoh and Nikon test, despite the fact that the Fuji was almost a month later and that the reviewer said that he was shooting this camera for almost 2 weeks exclusively.

3 upvotes

I know that certain spec heads will never be able to get this concept, but an excellent product is often the average of all its pros and cons. Some of you guys that want to take the X100s on a toe-to-toe witch hunt against every other camera out there based on this spec or that sample image on some review website can and will never be able to appreciate the end result of actually shooting with a camera like this because you are trapped by analysis paralysis. You are the seekers of the Holy Grail who never leave the castle because you don't yet have the finest sword ever made by man and you fail to realize you never will.

Here is all you and anyone else need to know, ever: the competition makes a swell product too. Go there, then, and frolic in the knowledge that your this or that brand has better DR than this or that other thing, or is sharper, or lighter, or cheaper. The X100 is something you actually have to use to fully appreciate, and it has all the character one ever needs.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 445

Editorial content

Product database

Community