-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
X100s back to X100
- Thread starter Dkaplan74
- Start date
Robert Tolputt
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 322
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 121
I'm interested to know why you are asking, but I bought my X100 just before the S appeared and was quite annoyed until I read some reviews. I am still very happy with my X100 and have no plans to change
pavi1
Veteran Member
He is asking because there are a large number of potential buyers who would like to know if it is worth waiting and paying the extra$
Fpr me the upgrade was worthwhile because resolution and lens performance have been improved and I'd never been satisfied with the X100 at F2 and 2.8.
To my eye both cameras produce virtually identical colour but the additional detail grabbed by the new version may account for some suggesting that images look more digital.
Some also say that the new jpegs can look smeary but that's not my experience with noise reduction set to -2. Shooting RAW + Jpeg I rarely use the RAW files.
I love the X100S as it feels like a polished product with years of life ahead producing fabulous IQ but I still like the "rougher" X100 and the promise of new firmware soon leaves it as a compelling camera to buy.
For me the X100S represents the best pocketable camera I've owned and worthy of its Gold Rating although if you can get an X100 at the right price why not try that first.
They are still expensive niche cameras that won't suit everybody.
Tony Bonanno
Senior Member
I had the X100 for a street project in Cuba a couple of years ago. I currently have a X100S and X-E1 for that work. The X100 had WONDERFUL files. Clarity, dynamic range, tonal gradation - overall an outstanding 12 MP sensor. Very good for B&W. The only reason I got rid of the camera was the AF performance wasn't measuring up for what I needed it for. This was prior to the later firmware updates that I believed fixed some of those issues. I find the X100S to be an improvement in most ways but not the sensor. The X-Trans rendering of very fine detail with certain subject matter is not quite as good, in my opinion, once the extra resolution is discounted. Doesn't matter whether we are talking JPEGS or RAW (and I've tested and used almost ALL the RAW conversion software currently available). Having said that, it is not a issue for most folks. On high res graphics displays, the fine detail smearing is visible at 100% when compared side by side to the files from similar 16 MP APS or M4/3 Bayer sensors. But who looks at files at 100% ? And 16x12" 300 ppi prints look fine. You'd be hard pressed to detect any sensor issues from an X100S (shooting RAW) using Lightroom 5 or Capture-One in a print. So the bottom line is that X100S, in most respects, is a very good choice. If you already have the earlier X100 (with the latest firmware), I'd just continue to use that camera, at least until the next generation of X cameras make their appearance. BTW, I do not find the lens on the X100S to be a better performer than the X100, despite the marketing hype. I realize that this reply is not exactly a response to the question you were asking, but hopefully is helpful.
--
Tony Bonanno Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
ASMP General member
www.bonannophoto.com
--
Tony Bonanno Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
ASMP General member
www.bonannophoto.com
Last edited:
photo perzon
Senior Member
The X100 yields gentler skin tones, n better for faces.
TitusXIII
Forum Enthusiast
Quite happy with my 100, do not plan on getting the s.
sgoldswo
Veteran Member
This question has been asked before, so this thread is repetitive: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51288212
I'll say what I said before on this topic. I can't say I get too excited about any perceived difference between the X100 and the X100S given that I much preferred the rendering from the X-Pro1 to the X100 in any case, but it isn't that different - to me the X100S looks more realistic or more film like (with realistic graduated colour transitions) whereas the X100 is more "digital" and if I'm honest its sometimes difficult to see the difference between files out of the X100 and the E-M5 + 17 F1.8 (the main difference being the performance/sharpness of the X100 lens).
The lens hasn't changed but the sensor has - the X100S has better colour transitions and greater resolution (much better than would be suggested by a move from 12 to 16mp). The X100S is (much) easier to recover in RAW if the exposure is off. The AF is faster. High ISO output looks much better on the X100S. The new control layout is superior.
This is my way of saying that I think it very unlikely that I'll be moving back to the X100 any time soon.
THere are plenty of reviews of the X100S out there and some even in direct comparison between the two. I have also written a review of those two cameras after using the original X100 for over 2 years and the X100S for over 3 month.
I think that this describes some of the real world usability differences between these two cameras:
http://fujixfiles.blogspot.com/2013/07/Fuji-X100S-Review-is-it-worth-to-upgrade.html
Cheers,
Smatty
=> Homepage
=> Recent Flickr Photos
sgoldswo
Veteran Member
Tony, I agree there is (at a low level) smearing of greens still present in output from ACR/LR and (to a lesser extent) Capture One. I've not seen it at all since I switched to Aperture. Aperture does suffer from colour artefacts and moire to an extent but that's a different problem that doesn't affect detail or sharpness. Aperture is, of course, Mac only.
I've also seen results from Irident that are as good as those from Aperture without any such artefacts (but to be honest the artefacts pale in comparison to the issues with the original LR RAW processing of x-trans files).
I guess my observation would be that there aren't really any (detail related) issues with RAW anymore, depending on your choice of RAW converter.
Have had an X100 (refurb) for about a year now, and tried the X100S when it came out - hoping it would be the complete cure-all for all the X100's many quirks and issues.
It solves an awful lot of them - the manual focus, moving the AF point, general speed. However, there were still far too many focusing problems for me to be able to trust it completely. This actually left me no better off really, as I still had to check (chimp) after most shots (using Manual AF and the AF lock button). So back it went.
Instead of the £500 extra it would have cost me I "invested" in an RX100, which has been a fabulous companion camera. And irritatingly fast and accurate at focusing...
It solves an awful lot of them - the manual focus, moving the AF point, general speed. However, there were still far too many focusing problems for me to be able to trust it completely. This actually left me no better off really, as I still had to check (chimp) after most shots (using Manual AF and the AF lock button). So back it went.
Instead of the £500 extra it would have cost me I "invested" in an RX100, which has been a fabulous companion camera. And irritatingly fast and accurate at focusing...
Tony Bonanno
Senior Member
Having used both I tend to agree with Smatty and Simon. However since the OP also owned both I'm wondering why he sold his X100 and what is his current opinion of the X100S.
Cheers.
Luego
MrChristopher
Senior Member
X100 but it's only a rumor.
--
Chris Curnutt Photography
Documenting what I see and experience. Based in Wimberley Texas
chriscurnutt.tumblr.com
Chris Curnutt Photography
Chris Curnutt Photography. 398 likes. I take photos, I post photos.
www.facebook.com
Davidgilmour
Senior Member
yes, the JPEG X-100 colors are nicer than X-100s. No smearing at all.
bwian
New member
Where did you hear about a new FW for X100?
For one I would love to get my trusty old x100 back. But it is more circumstantial. My x100 was working like a clock and travelled with me to many places. Excellent pics. Sold it, got x100s and the camera broke down completely during my first trip. Since I am now thousands of km from the repair center I actually had to buy a new camera (oly) before I can send the x100s for repair.
as for the differences, we would be splitting hair with af speed. The x100 image look is more unique, the s gives results like pro, e1 or new m1, while the x100 gives bit different feel. It is up to the user to say which he likes more.
Last edited:
Incidentally I have also rx100 and it is indeed like that, probably the best travel camera right now imho. It is amazing how Sony got their AF 100% nailed down on that little beast. Still of course for people like me who used to the look of x cameras there is always that little complains about the look of Sony images, but it is more of whining than a real problem. There is very little you can say neg about the rx100 and this is from a guy who had x100, has xpro 1 and had x100s (before it broke down).
Actually if one has x100 I would also suggest too look at rx100 as a companion instead of upgrading to x100s.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum