Draek
Veteran Member
True, but it's a simple extrapolation from the performance of current EXR sensors vs traditional ones.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Initially excited, now disappointed
- Thread starter worldcup1982
- Start date
Bernie Ess
Veteran Member
You buy something like the X10 for Fuji colours and for increased dynamic range. I had and sold the LX5 for it's flat and boring colour. The files were good, but they did not "touch" me.
If Fuji hasn't unlearned it's art, this little thing will produce beautiful files...
cheers
Bernie
'All the technique in the world doesn’t compensate for the inability to notice.' (Elliot Erwitt)
If Fuji hasn't unlearned it's art, this little thing will produce beautiful files...
cheers
Bernie
--
'All the technique in the world doesn’t compensate for the inability to notice.' (Elliot Erwitt)
R
rattymouse
Guest
Yes, yes yes! All this technical talk between the X10 and LX5 misses this key point. To some (not all), Panasonic color is extremely boring and uninspiring! Long ago I wanted an LX3. The camera just looked spectacular! Wonderful lens, nice size, great sharpness. But the color! My god, the color! It is sooooo uninspiring. Coming from a long time Fuji background, I place great value on good color and it has to be good out of the camera. Panasonic color is not even remotely good. I don't think there is any other camera brand that produces more dull, flat, and plain ugly color as Panny does.
Some people like it, and that is fine. Everyone is different. But Panny color is NOT for me.
--
http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
Daniel Lowe
Veteran Member
Yes you will.
This camera will have better control of depth of field than any other compact and M4/3rds camera out there.
R
Raist3d
Guest
I agree. It's frustrating because looking on a first pass, looks like the ergonomics are great. If they could do high iso B&W good enough for street life that would rock but I am skeptical about that sensor.
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo
--Hi Raist...the point is that it will have to be really better than already existing compact cameras, not just prettierdon't you think? specially at 700 usd (adorama)...
regards...
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo
The X10 starts from 28mm, not 24mm
I'm trying to understand this statement, but I am having difficulty getting my head around it. What exactly are you referring to when it comes to depth of field control, and how will the X10 give better DoF control than a m43 camera? I can understand better DoF control than other small sensor cameras, but better than a m43 camera?
--
Archiver - Loving Every Image Captured Always
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archiver/
tdkd13
Veteran Member
Your difficulty in understanding Daniel's statement is normal because his statement is not accurate. DOF is a very simple math problem so its very easy to show the differences between two systems.
Ted
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/
Ted
--
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/
Draek
Veteran Member
He's assuming you'll use the standard slow zoom instead of a prime lens on the m4/3 camera. You could say it's a bit of a flawed comparison, but it does have some logic: numbers do show that most buyers of entry-level dSLR users (and I believe mirrorless as well) either stay with the slow kit lens or only add a cheap telephoto zoom to it. Now, whether such an user would be interested in such a classically-designed camera retailing for (a rumored) $699 however...
Either way though, 112mm f/2.4 on a 2/3" sensor should provide shallow enough DOF for most intents and purposes. I've made some nice portraits even on a S3000 in the past, so me thinks some of you should stop sticking your camera right in your subject's faces and back down a couple steps instead of going for the dSLR at the first chance you've got
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek
Either way though, 112mm f/2.4 on a 2/3" sensor should provide shallow enough DOF for most intents and purposes. I've made some nice portraits even on a S3000 in the past, so me thinks some of you should stop sticking your camera right in your subject's faces and back down a couple steps instead of going for the dSLR at the first chance you've got
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek
captura
Veteran Member
There was indeed a color problem with the LX3 when it first came out. This was rectified by the first firmware update. Panasonics having a color problem is just your very subjective opinion. These cameras, just like any others, are subject to the owner choosing the best color balance and other settings. I own a Fuji and Panasonics and I can't say that the color of one is better or worse than the other. Including my LX3; a very fine camera indeed, and considered a classic.
noobdprseller
Forum Enthusiast
I remember with my S1 pro (3mp into 6mp) & S2 pro (6mp into 12mp) actual pixels vs Fuji pixels.6 mp is still enough for me
I could use my S2 at iso1600 clean. Its DR at the time was super.
X10 6mp (with sensor tech devt) & most importantly (as i know from my diigulux 2) a fine lens is hopefully going to be a killer.
noobdprseller
Forum Enthusiast
I feel the lens has a lot to do with it.
That tamron made on my s100fs is nice. As are the lenses on my digilux2, fuji s602, minolta a200, oly c8080, sony 717 ...
their lenses make a whole lotta difference.
I feel X10 lens with its 7 aperture blades is going to be a killer.
Daniel Lowe
Veteran Member
Thanks Draek, that's exactly what I meant.
Perhaps you other chaps could engage brain next time.
Perhaps you other chaps could engage brain next time.
R
rattymouse
Guest
The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens is very popular, so this assumption is just plain wrong.
--
http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
tdkd13
Veteran Member
Rather than ask "chaps" to engage brains why not just state your point clearly instead of relying on some silly after the fact qualifiers to save you. What you said was:
"This camera will have better control of depth of field than any other compact and M4/3rds camera out there."
This is quite simply wrong and you should be aware of that. If you need to add qualifiers to make your incorrect statement sound more feasable do so in the original post not after the fact and blame the reader for not reading your mind. Either way you look at it, qualifiers included, your statement is simply wrong.
Ted
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/
"This camera will have better control of depth of field than any other compact and M4/3rds camera out there."
This is quite simply wrong and you should be aware of that. If you need to add qualifiers to make your incorrect statement sound more feasable do so in the original post not after the fact and blame the reader for not reading your mind. Either way you look at it, qualifiers included, your statement is simply wrong.
Ted
--
http://photobucket.com/albums/y260/tdkd13/
Daniel Lowe
Veteran Member
I am no longer concerned with the belligerent camera knocking morons around here, do your own damned research.
Stephen 06
Veteran Member
errr....Lumix and Panasonic are all ONE name. You can't separate them as if they were two seperate type of users. Maybe its you who don't know what you are talking about.
Maybe you need to be informed that Lumix users are still holding the best camera in the world. Right now I have the LX5. It is still the best lowlight compact cameras in the world that I can use today. Have anyone here on this forum a X10? No. Does anyone on this forum even have a sample image from the X10 in lowlight?....no! Therefore, all you have is speculation. Speculation can't take photos today...but my LX5 can.
--
Stephen
Jon Schick
Veteran Member
Having moved to m43 some time ago, I swore never to buy a compact sensor camera again but.... having previously used the Panasonic LC1 with same sensor size and decent fast lens, I'm interested.
At the longer lengths the sensor is sufficiently large that it should be possible to control depth of field nicely with the X10, as long as the lens delivers high quality wide open. I'm hoping for a good minimum focus distance too. And 112mm equiv f2.8 lens is not something that is easy to replicate in m43 unless you use a much larger legacy zoom (eg Olympus 14-54), so if this camera even gets close to the image quality of m43 but in a much smaller package, then I'd love it as a second camera when I don't want to lug around much larger gear.
If the image stabilisation really is good for 4 stops, then you may be able to use this camera at ISO100 for telephoto shots that are likely to be taken at ISO400 or even 800 with the m43 kit zooms of comparable length. And under those circumstances I'm not sure that there'd be much difference in image quality when viewed/printed at normal rather than pixel-peeping sizes.
I would fully expect the Fuji sensor to be a vast improvement on the one in the LC1 (Digilux 2) and assume that ISO400 should be more than acceptable. And if I can get 6MP files with decent dynamic range that are good for A4 prints at ISO800 then I'd be very happy indeed, because with a nice fast lens I'm not sure I'd personally need to go much beyond that in most circumstances.
Bottom line for me is that if the reviews and user experience suggest that the promise has been fulfilled, then I might have to eat my words about never buying a compact digicam again - I think this one looks like the closest anyone has got to producing a convincing follow-up to the Leica Digilux 2/Panasonic LC1, and it was amazing what could be produced out of those cameras.
--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/
At the longer lengths the sensor is sufficiently large that it should be possible to control depth of field nicely with the X10, as long as the lens delivers high quality wide open. I'm hoping for a good minimum focus distance too. And 112mm equiv f2.8 lens is not something that is easy to replicate in m43 unless you use a much larger legacy zoom (eg Olympus 14-54), so if this camera even gets close to the image quality of m43 but in a much smaller package, then I'd love it as a second camera when I don't want to lug around much larger gear.
If the image stabilisation really is good for 4 stops, then you may be able to use this camera at ISO100 for telephoto shots that are likely to be taken at ISO400 or even 800 with the m43 kit zooms of comparable length. And under those circumstances I'm not sure that there'd be much difference in image quality when viewed/printed at normal rather than pixel-peeping sizes.
I would fully expect the Fuji sensor to be a vast improvement on the one in the LC1 (Digilux 2) and assume that ISO400 should be more than acceptable. And if I can get 6MP files with decent dynamic range that are good for A4 prints at ISO800 then I'd be very happy indeed, because with a nice fast lens I'm not sure I'd personally need to go much beyond that in most circumstances.
Bottom line for me is that if the reviews and user experience suggest that the promise has been fulfilled, then I might have to eat my words about never buying a compact digicam again - I think this one looks like the closest anyone has got to producing a convincing follow-up to the Leica Digilux 2/Panasonic LC1, and it was amazing what could be produced out of those cameras.
--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/
Daniel Lowe
Veteran Member
Jon, I think your summary is a good one.
All Fuji have to do now is manufacture these things to a good standard and I think they will sell themselves.
It would seem they have designed the X10 with people like yourself in mind.
All Fuji have to do now is manufacture these things to a good standard and I think they will sell themselves.
It would seem they have designed the X10 with people like yourself in mind.
Stephen
Like what they said about the sensor in the HS20 … something like “Full rich detail even in foliage in a landscape shot” LOL
--
JB
I am not a photographer, I’m just a guy that takes pictures.
http://buckshotsimageblog.blogspot.com/
:-D Some here know from experience that Fujifilm is all about hyping up the advertizing and stirring up the crowd. Then they deliver ½ to ¾ of what was advertized.
Like what they said about the sensor in the HS20 … something like “Full rich detail even in foliage in a landscape shot” LOL
--
JB
I am not a photographer, I’m just a guy that takes pictures.
http://buckshotsimageblog.blogspot.com/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum