Fuji x100 official samples are up

http://www.finepix-x100.com/en/gallery/images
So far, so good.

Confirmed European price of 999 Euro. UK price 999 pounds (but they have Premier league, so it sounds fair).

Some accessories:
flash EF-20 - 109,- Euro
flash EF-42 - 199,- Euro
sunshade LH-X100, with adapter ring AR-X100 - 79,90 Euro
adapter ring AR-X100 - 39,90 Euro
leather case SC-X100 - UVP: 109,- Euro

--
Dimitar Ivanov

Just as I thought that's the deal breaker for me, the one fixed and fairly wide angle lens. As is shown in several of the photos where they tried to shoot closer up. The little girls photo where her arm is large, the brown cat with distortion coming towards the lens. It's not a do it all camera as a few people may wish it to be. Also the colors in the first two flower shots are way over the top to my taste , though I suspect that's adjustable so not that big a deal if so.

The street scenes are fine and I know some here are interested in the camera for that purpose.

For me to be interested there would need to be some kind of a second lens or second focal length option, maybe something 55, maybe 60 or 70 ish. Even at that those shots I mentioned would go nice at about 35mm - 40mm.

A person could do a lot of work with the camera, all wide angle. While I don't mind some wide angle photography it's not my main thing, never has been. How about a small body DSLR or interchangeable lens rangefinder with the fuji sensor ? Incorporate some kind of shift mechanism to accept at least one more focal length efficiently. Then I'd be interested. Maybe the second iteration !

David

All it needs is screw on adapter to the front to narrow the angle of view a bit.

If Fuji comes with a 50mm adapter for it, I think that would be wise.

C
--

"Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude; nothing can help the man with wrong one."
-Thomas Jefferson

AlphaMountWorld.com

Many of them are over exposed with clipped highlights. Why? Because the photographer or the camera sucks?

Why would they post many images with blow out highlights? Not very impressive.

The color balance of the one cat picture is way too cold and they used a CWB. Like Dave, this is not a camera for me no matter how "cool" it looks. Retro is ok if the camera really delivers but just to have a cool looking camera doesn't cut it for me. If only it had interchangeable lens!! I would rather have a 4/3s camera with different lenses. I will just stick with my Canon G10.
Respectfully,
David Miller

billrey said:

Many of them are over exposed with clipped highlights. Why? Because the photographer or the camera sucks?

Why would they post many images with blow out highlights? Not very impressive.

Click to expand...

Fuji's samples have really be awful for the last year or so. The HS10 and the F300EXR all had samples that made even the most die hard fan stop and questioning their purchase.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/

mmmmmmmm said:

The color balance of the one cat picture is way too cold and they used a CWB. Like Dave, this is not a camera for me no matter how "cool" it looks. Retro is ok if the camera really delivers but just to have a cool looking camera doesn't cut it for me. If only it had interchangeable lens!! I would rather have a 4/3s camera with different lenses. I will just stick with my Canon G10.

Click to expand...

I like cool cameras as much as the next person, but I don't want one that can't deliver image quality equal to the dollars spent. Makes the Oly EP-series or even the Samsung TL500 look like a steal. I do know there are people out there that well buy this just because it's COOL, but I won't be one of them this time. Older and slightly wiser I guess. JohnW

mmmmmmmm said:

Respectfully,
David Miller

Click to expand...

billrey said:

Many of them are over exposed with clipped highlights. Why? Because the photographer or the camera sucks?

Why would they post many images with blow out highlights? Not very impressive.

Click to expand...

Did you look at the EXIF data. Some of them are shot at +2/3 EV meaning the blown highlights were intentional. Sometimes you have to blow out highlights to get the contrast and snap you want. Blown highlights on a face or significant detail are a bad thing, but often there are highlight that need to go.

Photography isn't about a mathematical formula, it's about human perception.

Not that I'm going to run out and buy it for $1,300, but there's nothing wrong with these images as photographs.

Tom

http://www.kachadurian.com
http://www.kachadurian.com/blog

mmmmmmmm said:

The color balance of the one cat picture is way too cold and they used a CWB. Like Dave, this is not a camera for me no matter how "cool" it looks. Retro is ok if the camera really delivers but just to have a cool looking camera doesn't cut it for me. If only it had interchangeable lens!! I would rather have a 4/3s camera with different lenses. I will just stick with my Canon G10.

Click to expand...

Maybe spend a little of that money you are saving getting yourself some monitor calibration. Than Cat photo is perfect. It shows exactly what the lens can do as well. Look at how perfectly smooth it is as the things go out of focus. No M43 has that quality.

Now it just needs to get down to about $900 and come in black.

Tom

http://www.kachadurian.com
http://www.kachadurian.com/blog

I'll wait till sample RAW images show up, those seem to be in camera JPEGs with some 'cool' effects.

Weird that the square (the most powerful ratio) option was not included in the crop image ratios, while they were already at that. Could be later via FW though I believe.

The same for movie flexibility, seems like it was added because of must not want.

For JPG output, this looks pretty solid. Edges are good. People are of course complaing about the relatively low contrast.....which is better than pumpimg it up to have some Velvia look to it. Lots of room for PP.

To have this level of quality in a small camera is welcome. 35mm equivalent is great for general shooting. It's my normal "standard" lens on my Bessa R2a.

Price aint bad considering what it is.

• At DP here, it was written:

"The lens doesn't extend on startup, which makes for very fast turn-on times."
( http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx100/page3.asp )

Reading from the final specs it seems that the startup time is 2.2 sec, which is in my opinion nowhere near to be called "fast startup".

There is, however, a faster wake-up time 0.7 sec, but it is no monster speed too, I'd even say a bit slow?

• "It makes the camera exceptionally quiet in use, and allows flash sync at high speeds"

( http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx100/page3.asp )ˇ

For some reason, I cannot verify the sync speed in available official materials? Hopefully all the way up full flash sync speed capability (1/4000)?

Notwithstanding the limitations of a fixed focus lens, my one concern about the camera was that 12 megapixels is a little on the light side these days for those who like to print big. So, I took a couple of the images into PS, upsampled to 32 x 48 inch at 300dpi, added a little smart sharpening, pushed the image content around a bit with an additional curve, and these jpegs held up very well. I assume a RAW file would give me even more to work with. A single strand of hair lying on the child's cheek is clearly visible in the portrait of the little girl, and after upsampling/sharpening it would still print nicely crisp on a large format printer. All in all, this camera won't be for everybody, but it does have some game!

cheers,
--
Mark McCormick
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

MiTaka said:

http://www.finepix-x100.com/en/gallery/images
So far, so good.

Confirmed European price of 999 Euro. UK price 999 pounds (but they have Premier league, so it sounds fair).

Some accessories:
flash EF-20 - 109,- Euro
flash EF-42 - 199,- Euro
sunshade LH-X100, with adapter ring AR-X100 - 79,90 Euro
adapter ring AR-X100 - 39,90 Euro
leather case SC-X100 - UVP: 109,- Euro

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. BTW, where did you get the prices?

So it seems really to be 999€ + 79,90€ + 109€ = 1190€ in total. At least for me. For I can't imaging having portable camera without a lens cap (or any decent protection for the front element) and without a good case.

Mark McCormick said:

Notwithstanding the limitations of a fixed focus lens, my one concern about the camera was that 12 megapixels is a little on the light side these days for those who like to print big. So, I took a couple of the images into PS, upsampled to 32 x 48 inch at 300dpi, added a little smart sharpening, pushed the image content around a bit with an additional curve, and these jpegs held up very well. I assume a RAW file would give me even more to work with. A single strand of hair lying on the child's cheek is clearly visible in the portrait of the little girl, and after upsampling/sharpening it would still print nicely crisp on a large format printer. All in all, this camera won't be for everybody, but it does have some game!

cheers,
--
Mark McCormick
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

Click to expand...

For me, the 12mp is perfect for a half decent 16x24. Really, the camera was designed as a handheld device....and as such, anything much more than 12mp is lost to motion blur and focus inaccuracy anyway. To have prints larger than 16x24 requires good technique and a steady tripod.

As a walkabout street camera, casual shooting, secondary body, etc, the X100 looks pretty good. As I do a fair bit of weddings using a rangefinder and 35mm for the B&W, this is a perfect digital alternative. 12mp is more than enough for any wedding album!

He swore up and down the thing wouldn't ship as Fuji originally stated.

Has this camera shipped? Don't think so. Wake me when it does but then again, I really don't care. Most of the images shown are horrid.

The only two that looked reasonable were the little girl and one of the colored cat pics. Most look to be very soft with lots of noise and a general lack of sufficient contrast. World Famous Fuji dynamic range? Forget it! That's gone. I've never seen more blown highlight in a manufacturer's own image release. Its mindboggling really.

Some of this may be due to the fact that engineers might have taken these shots. We can only hope so. No professional photographer I know would ever cotton up to this camera based on these images.

Thanks for sharing the link.

Most of the images look good to me. They represent what a majority of advanced amateur photographer might take if they had the camera in their hands today.

Quality wise the images are on par with the Leica 35mm 1.4 ASPH lens. If you do not have this lens, you will have to take my word on that it is an excellent lens and produces high IQ images.

Any one who has experience with wide angle lenses will tell you that the close up distortion is typical of any wide angle lens. Leica and Canon 35mm 1.4 lenses exhibit the same type of distortion to one degree or another.

The fact that such images are being displayed tells me Fuji is not hiding anything from the knowledgeable photographer and potential buyer.

Overall I was impressed by the sample images.

With that said, I assume those of us who have no need for this expensive point and shoot camera will express their negative opinions as if is was going to make a difference to those who like the camera or those who reserve judgement into all the facts are in and those who do not. Not unlike a driver of a car honking their horn at others on the road.

Personally I cannot wait to see the production camera review here at dpreview.com. Hopefully the camera will earn their highest recommendation. Until then I can wait since new digital cameras come out monthly.

Thanks again for the link.

d2f

I don't need this camera, because I have enough stuff in the closet, but ... It's just so beautiful. If I was to make this camera the price would be double.
--
Dimitar Ivanov

Thought the same, very nice edge definition, without excessive sharpening. Nice colors, nothing extraordinary, images look natural, like film used to look (hate one someone says that, but this is the best description).

--
Dimitar Ivanov