Reading mode: Light Dark

Does anyone have a X10 pic or seen one online that has the following components......

Go to last post
Trevor G said:
The point of this exercise is to show that you can shoot in adverse lighting conditions, without using any special techniques, and not get white discs.

Unless you call using DR400 a special technique. I just call it commonsense use of the standout feature of the X10's sensor.

I use DR400 all the time. I cannot understand why anyone would use DR100. Ever.
Click to expand...
I'm curious as to how people would classify this lighting condition. Would you classify it as "adverse"? To me, it's just a common picture of a glass with nothing adverse about it at all. Plenty of light at 1/280th of a second, 100ISO, F2. Why would I (or anyone) choose to shoot at ISO 400 (thus allowing DR400) in this case? There are 3 non organic, hard edged, white discs in the logo of the glass. Sorry, I like my X10 and will continue to shoot it, but this isn't normal:



 
I've followed this debate more out of a concern for Fuji itself rather than any immediate interest in this specific camera. I've thought the volume of hand-wringing has been overwrought (and therefore suspect) up until now.

(I will admit that had I spent that amount of money and gotten orbs all over the kind of shots I like to take I'd be outraged...though I'd have acted decisively and not been as voluble about it.)

But your experience has convinced me that, hysteria aside, the problem deserves harsh condemnation and renders the cam generally unacceptable (despite its real charms and benefits to certain users).

I hope your experience serves as a wake-up call to prospective buyers of this cam, especially those without access to a seller with liberal return policies.

Fuji faces one of those moments of truth. Any honorable course will be accompanied by significant pain for the company. I hope it will find it within itself to do the right thing by the affected customers.
rattymouse said:
ljclark said:
Hoboken Michelle said:
I do not wish to be referred to that pic by rattymouse in the mall where the orb is located near the guy's midsection (thank you for the pic anyway, rattymouse).
Click to expand...
Where I would expect them to pop up is in a situation where you have a fairly tight light source and when you are shooting at lower ISOs -- ISO 100 certainly and then less of a problem as you increase ISO. In my experience, they are gone by ISO 800,
Click to expand...
You are incorrect. This image was shot at ISO800. It has a nice fat juicy ORB in it. Raising ISO does virtually nothing to mitigate ORBS . This ORB was made by a shielded 100 watt light bulb.


Member said:
but that's not where you want to be for skin tones. The places to look for will be eyes, jewelry, perhaps teeth, and eyeglass frames.

If the data is included in the uploaded photo, check the ISO. Street night shots at ISO 100 or 200 are probably the products of orb hunters, so keep that in mind when you evaluate the results.
Click to expand...
Again, high ISO offers you NOTHING in way of protection from ORBS . Another ISO 800 shot:



ANOTHER ISO800 shot:



Another ISO800 shot.



Get the point? I could post on and on images with ORBS at high ISO.
Member said:
Also consider the size of the orb in the final output. There are some real concerns with the orbs, but there is also a ton of pixel peeping and measurebating going on in this forum. My guess is that 99.9% of photos in the real world (not by forum members) don't have a problem with orbs -- either because they don't exist, or because they are not apparent/objectionable in the chosen output.
Click to expand...
Member said:
Some contributors seem to be "focusing" on self-fulfilling prophecies -- despite claims that they don't go looking for the orbs. Not sure whether they are looking for sympathy, or are just into self-flagellation. ;)
Click to expand...
More RDFB nonsense. You apparently have no interest in good quality images free from defects . I suggest to you that 99.9% of the people who spend $600 or more want a camera that can outperform a $100 camera. The X10, laughably and demonstrably, CANNOT capture light as well as a cheapo camera.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
Click to expand...
--
Tim
 
Tim39 said:
Fuji faces one of those moments of truth. Any honorable course will be accompanied by significant pain for the company. I hope it will find it within itself to do the right thing by the affected customers.
Click to expand...
Short term pain, yes. But if they're thinking long term and strategically, it's just a financial blip on the radar to take care of customers affected by this issue. I was really interested in purchasing the X-Pro 1, but I'm now seriously reconsidering (and it hasn't even come out yet). They'd gain a customer out of me for life (and many others I'm sure), if they took care of this "honorably". The short term pain is small, compared to the long term gains of doing the right thing.

I wish they'd be more forthcoming with what the real issue is instead of keeping us in the dark. They just said they'll take care of it (or make it appear less) in the next firmware, which they didn't do. They've given no explanation of what is failing in the system.
 
I literally have hundreds of shots with orbs in them.

I have –NO- shots where the people’s bodies or clothing have exaggerated orbs (hard edged roundish larger than catch light) – unless- there is something shiny which can catch some light. To make it more clear, I have never seen any shots where the skin of an individual has an orb formed on it that was not the result of a shiny/reflective something being very close to the skin.

But

I have seen perfectly round catch light discs (but not exaggerated-larger than life) in the eyes of some shots.

Do not discount jewelry, glasses and occasional background surfaces from interacting with your shots.









wj

--
nikonandricoh
 
wymjym said:
Click to expand...
Wow, now that's bad. It bloomed to the guys chin and whited out part of it! That's one of the worst I've seen. I could live with orbs for night shooting as I don't do a lot of it, but if its and issue in the bright sunlight and people can be impacted by it...wow. I may have to rethink the XS-1 / X-10 I'm pondering....I love my X100 :-)
--
-Ken
http://www.kwaphoto.com
 
kwa_photo said:
wymjym said:
Click to expand...
Wow, now that's bad. It bloomed to the guys chin and whited out part of it! That's one of the worst I've seen. I could live with orbs for night shooting as I don't do a lot of it, but if its and issue in the bright sunlight and people can be impacted by it...wow. I may have to rethink the XS-1 / X-10 I'm pondering....I love my X100 :-)
--
-Ken
Click to expand...
I have not seen anything like that with the XS1. The orbs are well enough controlled that, in the case of the XS1, I think that a very slight adjustment to your shooting style will eliminate the orb potential ( I really like the XS1--not so much the X10)

wj
--
nikonandricoh
 
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
I think it (exif info) is attached....only cropped/resized to show the detail....this is when it becomes frustrating....should anyone really need to shoot the daylight shots at iso800?

These were taken maybe the second day I had the camera...it was an astoundingly bright, beautiful clear sky day....great for everything in life.

wj
--
nikonandricoh
 
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
 
DS21 said:
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
Click to expand...
If it doesn't matter why not show the photo data? Why not? Is there an issue? I show mine with no problem..... I'd like to see the settings!
 
Will Hickman said:
DS21 said:
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
Click to expand...
If it doesn't matter why not show the photo data? Why not? Is there an issue? I show mine with no problem..... I'd like to see the settings!
Click to expand...
life is too short to type everything over and over and over
you can download this utility for free

http://www.photome.de/download_en.html

and then simply copy an image onto your computer and insert it into the photome utility...it will give you more information than one might ever expect to find

wj

--
nikonandricoh
 
kwa_photo said:
wymjym said:
Click to expand...
Wow, now that's bad. It bloomed to the guys chin and whited out part of it! That's one of the worst I've seen. I could live with orbs for night shooting as I don't do a lot of it, but if its and issue in the bright sunlight and people can be impacted by it...wow. I may have to rethink the XS-1 / X-10 I'm pondering....I love my X100 :-)
--
-Ken
http://www.kwaphoto.com
Click to expand...
Imagine if it had been that guy in "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre"! :O
 
DS21 said:
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
Click to expand...
You have to understand, Will is doing everything possible to absolve Fujifilm from making a defective camera and instead place ALL of the blame on the user. Thus he needs EXIF info to distract others and launch attacks on the user.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
 
Tim39 said:
I've followed this debate more out of a concern for Fuji itself rather than any immediate interest in this specific camera. I've thought the volume of hand-wringing has been overwrought (and therefore suspect) up until now.

(I will admit that had I spent that amount of money and gotten orbs all over the kind of shots I like to take I'd be outraged...though I'd have acted decisively and not been as voluble about it.)

But your experience has convinced me that, hysteria aside, the problem deserves harsh condemnation and renders the cam generally unacceptable (despite its real charms and benefits to certain users).
Click to expand...
The deniers drive up the hysteria level. Their nonsense counterpoints, ridiculous excuses, and completely baseless made up "stats" on ORB occurrence provoke extraordinary replies.

Yes, the X10 deserves harsh condemnation. Both for the people who dropped hard cash on this useless brick, AND for the future cameras, that they might be tested and released in a functioning state.

Deniers like Trevor work tirelessly to prevent quality standards from being set and met.
Tim39 said:
I hope your experience serves as a wake-up call to prospective buyers of this cam, especially those without access to a seller with liberal return policies.
Click to expand...
That is entirely the point. Everyone except the deniers understand that.
Tim39 said:
Fuji faces one of those moments of truth. Any honorable course will be accompanied by significant pain for the company. I hope it will find it within itself to do the right thing by the affected customers.
Click to expand...
I hope so too, but I dont expect Fujfilm to have such good ethics.
 
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Another X10 shot taken under extreme, ridiculous circumstances:
daylight... ISO100... 1/400th of a second... f7.1...
Nobody would ever use outrageous settings like those, now would they.

-EXIF IFD0

Camera Make {0x010F} = FUJIFILM
Camera Model {0x0110} = X10
Picture Orientation {0x0112} = normal (1)
X-Resolution {0x011A} = 105/1 ===> 105
Y-Resolution {0x011B} = 105/1 ===> 105
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} = inch (2)
Software / Firmware Version {0x0131} = Digital Camera X10 Ver1.02
Last Modified Date/Time {0x0132} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) {0x0213} = co-sited / datum point (2)
Copyright Owner {0x8298} =

EXIF Sub IFD

Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) {0x829A} = 10/4000 second ===> 1/400 second ===> 0.0025 second
Lens F-Number / F-Stop {0x829D} = 710/100 ===> ƒ 7.1
Exposure Program {0x8822} = aperture priority (3)
ISO Speed Ratings {0x8827} = 100
Unknown tag, Tagnum 0x8830 {0x8830} = data ===> 1
EXIF Version {0x9000} = 0230
Original Date/Time {0x9003} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Digitization Date/Time {0x9004} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Components Configuration {0x9101} = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
Compressed Bits per Pixel {0x9102} = 32/10 ===> 3.2
Shutter Speed Value (APEX) {0x9201} = 868/100
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/410.15 second
Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9202} = 570/100
Aperture = ƒ 7.21
Brightness (APEX) {0x9203} = 907/100
Brightness = 537.45 foot-lambert
Exposure Bias (EV) {0x9204} = -33/100 ===> -0.33
Max Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9205} = 200/100 ===> 2
Max Aperture = ƒ 2
Metering Mode {0x9207} = pattern / multi-segment (5)
Light Source / White Balance {0x9208} = unknown (0)
Flash {0x9209} = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length {0x920A} = 710/100 mm ===> 7.1 mm
Maker Note {0x927C} =
FlashPix Version {0xA000} = 0100
Colour Space {0xA001} = sRGB (1)
Image Width {0xA002} = 736 pixels
Image Height {0xA003} = 421 pixels
Focal Plane X-Resolution {0xA20E} = 4554/1 ===> 4554
Focal Plane Y-Resolution {0xA20F} = 4554/1 ===> 4554
Focal Plane X/Y-Resolution Unit {0xA210} = centimeter (3)
Image Sensing Method {0xA217} = one-chip color area sensor (2)
Image Source {0xA300} = digital still camera (DSC)
Scene Type {0xA301} = directly photographed image
Custom Rendered {0xA401} = normal process (0)
Exposure Mode {0xA402} = auto exposure (0)
White Balance {0xA403} = auto (0)
Scene Capture Type {0xA406} = standard (0)
Sharpness {0xA40A} = normal (0)
Subject Distance Range {0xA40C} = unknown (0)

EXIF IFD1

Compression {0x0103} = JPEG compression (6)
Picture Orientation {0x0112} = rotated 90° (6)
X-Resolution {0x011A} = 72/1 ===> 72
Y-Resolution {0x011B} = 72/1 ===> 72
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} = inch (2)
Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) {0x0213} = co-sited / datum point (2)
Embedded thumbnail image:

EXIF Interoperability IFD

Interoperability Index {0x0001} = R98
Interoperability Version {0x0002} = 0100
 
Will Hickman said:
DS21 said:
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
Click to expand...
If it doesn't matter why not show the photo data? Why not? Is there an issue? I show mine with no problem..... I'd like to see the settings!
Click to expand...
There ya go.... I use Firefox with an Add-on that reads EXIF data if it's available.

EXIF IFD0

Camera Make {0x010F} = FUJIFILM
Camera Model {0x0110} = X10
Picture Orientation {0x0112} = normal (1)
X-Resolution {0x011A} = 105/1 ===> 105
Y-Resolution {0x011B} = 105/1 ===> 105
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} = inch (2)
Software / Firmware Version {0x0131} = Digital Camera X10 Ver1.02
Last Modified Date/Time {0x0132} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) {0x0213} = co-sited / datum point (2)
Copyright Owner {0x8298} =
Unknown tag, Tagnum 0xc4a5 {0xC4A5} = data ===>

EXIF Sub IFD

Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) {0x829A} = 10/4000 second ===> 1/400 second ===> 0.0025 second
Lens F-Number / F-Stop {0x829D} = 710/100 ===> ƒ 7.1
Exposure Program {0x8822} = aperture priority (3)
ISO Speed Ratings {0x8827} = 100
Unknown tag, Tagnum 0x8830 {0x8830} = data ===> 1
EXIF Version {0x9000} = 0230
Original Date/Time {0x9003} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Digitization Date/Time {0x9004} = 2011:11:12 13:00:25
Components Configuration {0x9101} = 0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
Compressed Bits per Pixel {0x9102} = 32/10 ===> 3.2
Shutter Speed Value (APEX) {0x9201} = 868/100
Shutter Speed (Exposure Time) = 1/410.15 second
Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9202} = 570/100
Aperture = ƒ 7.21
Brightness (APEX) {0x9203} = 907/100
Brightness = 537.45 foot-lambert
Exposure Bias (EV) {0x9204} = -33/100 ===> -0.33
Max Aperture Value (APEX) {0x9205} = 200/100 ===> 2
Max Aperture = ƒ 2
Metering Mode {0x9207} = pattern / multi-segment (5)
Light Source / White Balance {0x9208} = unknown (0)
Flash {0x9209} = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length {0x920A} = 710/100 mm ===> 7.1 mm
Maker Note {0x927C} =
FlashPix Version {0xA000} = 0100
Colour Space {0xA001} = sRGB (1)
Image Width {0xA002} = 736 pixels
Image Height {0xA003} = 421 pixels
Focal Plane X-Resolution {0xA20E} = 4554/1 ===> 4554
Focal Plane Y-Resolution {0xA20F} = 4554/1 ===> 4554
Focal Plane X/Y-Resolution Unit {0xA210} = centimeter (3)
Image Sensing Method {0xA217} = one-chip color area sensor (2)
Image Source {0xA300} = digital still camera (DSC)
Scene Type {0xA301} = directly photographed image
Custom Rendered {0xA401} = normal process (0)
Exposure Mode {0xA402} = auto exposure (0)
White Balance {0xA403} = auto (0)
Scene Capture Type {0xA406} = standard (0)
Sharpness {0xA40A} = normal (0)
Subject Distance Range {0xA40C} = unknown (0)

EXIF IFD1

Compression {0x0103} = JPEG compression (6)
Picture Orientation {0x0112} = rotated 90° (6)
X-Resolution {0x011A} = 72/1 ===> 72
Y-Resolution {0x011B} = 72/1 ===> 72
X/Y-Resolution Unit {0x0128} = inch (2)
Y/Cb/Cr Positioning (Subsampling) {0x0213} = co-sited / datum point (2)
Embedded thumbnail image:

EXIF Interoperability IFD

Interoperability Index {0x0001} = R98
Interoperability Version {0x0002} = 0100

--
'Bass-ackward' does not equate to 'superior'.
 
rattymouse said:
DS21 said:
Will Hickman said:
Interesting! No settings info? No post processing info? No cropping info? What's the original look like? Whazz up wid dat?
Click to expand...
Why does the settings or crop size matter, is there any other camera in existence where background orb is eating someone's face in the foreground? Pretty hard to make excuses for this one. Not a night time photography with bright lights, no adverse lighting conditions, it must be the user error because the photo was not deleted and re-shot with ISO set to 1600 or 3200 to avoid orbs (plus sizable EV- to plunge the photo more in the darkness, more friendly to the X10 sensor delicate sensibilities).
Click to expand...
You have to understand, Will is doing everything possible to absolve Fujifilm from making a defective camera and instead place ALL of the blame on the user. Thus he needs EXIF info to distract others and launch attacks on the user.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/
Click to expand...
The defenders are losing steam....the tide is turning...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top