Fujifilm X100S Real-world Samples

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

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.

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

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

Mar 21, 2013permalink

InTheMist

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

Mar 24, 2013permalink

Pat Cullinan Jr

Is DSCF0135 a father-daughter shot?

Pretty nice.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

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

Mar 22, 2013permalink

MI6G

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.

Mar 24, 2013permalink

Spectro

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.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

MI6G

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 .

Mar 20, 2013permalink

OfcrMike

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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

photog4u

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! ;)

Mar 20, 2013permalink

OfcrMike

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

umbalito

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.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

armanius

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

wolfloid

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?

Mar 20, 2013permalink

goosel

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

wolfloid

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!

Mar 20, 2013permalink

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

blu3

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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

rfsIII

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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

Cal22

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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

blu3

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

@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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

Kwick1

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Dan Nikon

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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

Really Dan? You're still talking?

Mar 21, 2013permalink

Dan Nikon

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...

Mar 21, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 22, 2013*permalink

The Davinator

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.

Mar 28, 2013permalink

Peter62

The Hi-ISO images are phantastic!

I am highly impressed!

Mar 19, 2013permalink

ogl

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

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

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

NorthwestF

X100s Studio shots

Mar 19, 2013permalink

DaytonR

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

rusticus

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

obeythebeagle

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Examples?

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

CarlPH

Surprise! your world was actually different than theirs :)

Mar 19, 2013permalink

PascallacsaP

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Revenant

"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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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....

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

PJInTheUSA

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

InTheMist

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

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

And it is about time somebody did!

Mar 20, 2013permalink

Pat Cullinan Jr

More photos of horseshoe crabs, please.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

JackM

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Andy_Elliott

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

gl2k

The dough is fluffy.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

digby dart

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

elvedhel

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

JakeB

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Richard Murdey

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

Mar 20, 2013permalink

GeorgeFellows

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

LensBeginner

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Photomonkey

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.

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

Dennis Linden

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

photo perzon

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'

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

ashwins

Nice set of pictures.

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

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

(unknown member)

Rectified if the shooter...

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

The shooter did both.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

@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.

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

John

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.

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

Dan Nikon

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...

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

@ 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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

philcozz

High ISO looks pretty nice, to me.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

phoozy

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

for the triple price, sure ;)

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

@ 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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

@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

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

@ 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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

Then give us at least equal to bayer resolution ;)

Mar 20, 2013permalink

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 :)

Mar 20, 2013permalink

skimble

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

arpikusz

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

1. bad light
2. bad composition

And sometimes bad white balance. :(

Mar 19, 2013permalink

raducdz

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

EricWN

That's just you.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

solsang

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...

Mar 19, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

felixspencer

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

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

zinedi

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

raducdz

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

_Federico_

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...

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Marcelobtp

@_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.

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

LensBeginner

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?

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

HBowman

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

EricWN

Cameras generally don't worry. Fanboys do.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

jon404

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

McDuff

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Whopper

It's an Grumman F7F Tigercat.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Ok, thank you Barney to clarify my doubt.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

MrSkelter

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

plasnu

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

tkbslc

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

ET2

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

fakuryu

@ET2

HAHAHA once again, ignorance is bliss...

Mar 19, 2013permalink

NorthwestF

n/a

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

Gasman66

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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’

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

chooflaki

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

@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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

@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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Silvarum

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).

Mar 19, 2013permalink

@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.

Mar 20, 2013*permalink

@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.

Mar 20, 2013permalink

Silvarum

@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.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

TonyinJapan

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?

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

HiRez

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).

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Corwin Lee

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Andrew Westlake

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

(unknown member)

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

digby dart

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

vFunct

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

photo perzon

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Photomonkey

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

vkphoto

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

Mar 19, 2013*permalink

Fixed, thanks for spotting that.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

digby dart

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

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

Thanks! I appreciate the kind words.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Pat Cullinan Jr

More macro photos of nematodes, please.

Mar 21, 2013permalink

maxnoy

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

M Lammerse

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.

Mar 19, 2013permalink

marike6

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink

Daniel from Bavaria

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!

Mar 19, 2013permalink

tkbslc

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

Mar 19, 2013permalink