Fujifilm X-T100 first impressions from a Pentax shooter...
I recently acquired a used X-T100 with the 15-45 kit lens. I've been carrying around a K-3 as my main body (usually with the DA 16-85) and a K-30 (usually with the DA 10-17) as my ultrawide second body and backup. Depending on the situation, I might also have some of: DA 21, DA 40XS, a fast fifty, DAL 55-300. For general purpose hiking when I want to go light, I'd use the K-30 with the 18-135.
I got the X-T100 to replace the K-30. I wanted something smaller/lighter. I tend to shoot wide, so the 15-45 sounded like a good walkaround option, and I figured I can get the proper adapters to use my old M42 lens and my Pentax DA ones. My thought was to use the K-3 with the DA 16-85 as my primary body, and I have had great experiences with that combo. I would use the Fuji with the 15-45 for street shooting and also use it as a second body with the DA 10-17 for ultrawide or switch to the DAL 55-300 for telephoto. (Though I'm wondering how that telephoto will work without image stabilization.)
Things about the X-T100 that I dislike or am getting used to:
In comparing the K-3 with the 16-85 and the X-T100 with the 15-45 over the same range..
I recently acquired a used X-T100 with the 15-45 kit lens. I've been carrying around a K-3 as my main body (usually with the DA 16-85) and a K-30 (usually with the DA 10-17) as my ultrawide second body and backup. Depending on the situation, I might also have some of: DA 21, DA 40XS, a fast fifty, DAL 55-300. For general purpose hiking when I want to go light, I'd use the K-30 with the 18-135.
I got the X-T100 to replace the K-30. I wanted something smaller/lighter. I tend to shoot wide, so the 15-45 sounded like a good walkaround option, and I figured I can get the proper adapters to use my old M42 lens and my Pentax DA ones. My thought was to use the K-3 with the DA 16-85 as my primary body, and I have had great experiences with that combo. I would use the Fuji with the 15-45 for street shooting and also use it as a second body with the DA 10-17 for ultrawide or switch to the DAL 55-300 for telephoto. (Though I'm wondering how that telephoto will work without image stabilization.)
Things about the X-T100 that I dislike or am getting used to:
- It's taking a bit to get used to the button locations. Finding the wheel on the back is especially hard without looking.
- I simply had to turn off autofocus on the touch screen (drove me crazy accidentally touching it and moving focus point)
- I often lock the back array of buttons around the menu button, since it is too easy to bump them.
- The camera is a bit pokey. I mainly do stills so it's not really an issue for me. (I haven't tried the oft-criticized video.)
- It is not weather-sealed.
- I do wish it had in-body image stabilization so that I could use my old manual lenses with more confidence.
- The Fuji RAF files are huge. (~40MB)
- It is indeed much smaller and lighter.
- This is my first camera with a tilt/turn LCD, and that's very nice.
- The electronic viewfinder does the job for me. I like that the electronic level is a line across the screen. (The little bars on the bottom on my K-3 and K-30 mean I have to look away from my focal point, and that's been awkward at times.)
- I'm shooting in Aperture mode and set the multipurpose dial to change exposure and the ISO button to set up some regularly used auto settings. It's also been best to just use AF-S.
- I don't mind the PowerZoom of the kit lens. When I'm shooting with AF, the front ring works as a zoom ring. (It's a manual focus ring in MF mode.)
- I shoot RAW with my Pentax and RAF+JPG on the Fuji. Fuji does a really nice job with JPG output. I won't feel much loss at times if I'm doing less serious work to just shoot JPG.
- The Fuji RAF files have the Lightroom lens profile included in the file. One less step of correction.
In comparing the K-3 with the 16-85 and the X-T100 with the 15-45 over the same range..
- The K-3 has 3.5 stops of stabilization. The 15-45 has 3 stops, but I'm getting less blurry results shooting handheld in lowlight with the Fuji at same focal lengths.
- Fuji tends to blow out highlights more (and I'm using -.3EV), but I need to play with it more.
- Do note that the 16-85 f3.5-5.6 is faster at 45mm at f4.5 than the 15-45 f3.5-5.6.
- At the wide end (15/16mm), it really pains me to say that I get better results with the Fuji. They are similar in the center but that little Fuji kit lens does better at the edges under a variety of f-stops but mainly f8. The K-3/16-85 does a slightly better job at the 45mm end. (This is after doing typical and similar postprocessing work in Lightroom.)
- I know that there have been negative critiques of the 15-45 on this forum, but I must have gotten a good copy. I would say mine is better in general at the 15mm than at the 45mm end.
- It's clear that there are different sensors and how they are working even though they are both 24MP APS-C. The Fuji does seem to pick up finer details. (I'll have to do more testing w/ Pentax primes to see if it's a lens issue and not a sensor issue. I'm just figuring for now that the DA 16-85 should be able to stand up to the 15-45.)
- The most noticeable difference is color cast, especially with greens. Pentax tends to blue, Fuji to yellow. I see benefits/drawbacks of both depending on situation, and such things can be adjusted with the RAW files in LR.
- I'm trying to describe the different types of noise in images. The K-3 has a much larger dynamic range, but at similar ISOs (e.g., 1600), there may be more noise in the Fuji images, but it's finer and mainly luminance noise that can be fixed. I.e., except in the lowest light situations, I think I'll be fine with the Fuji.
