Fuji X-T100, experience so far

Advent1sam wrote:

Smallpox wrote:

I thought I'd try again with this review and then in a couple of posts about the af, Having tried several versions of Sony's a6000 line, incl slt variants too I continue to be underwhelmed by their aps-c lenses at the more affordable end and the image quality always needs so much work from raw too. My recent experience with the a6500 was very mixed, with the sigma 1.4 sigma it was so buggy and so poor at focusing, it doent' focus at apertures around 1.8-2.2 with the evf, this is not a joke. Apparently it was similar with the 30 too and some of the faster Sony native lenses as well. But the evf was crude, the interface involved multiple button presses and the general ergo was absolutely naff. Most of all the lenses were big and expensive for the better FF, basically in an effort to get you on the FF line. General iq of the a6500 in real world use was also poor, shadows are noisy and getting a nice clean shot ooc almost impossible imo, metering was rubbish. In the end I retreated to m43 again, another failed effort with mirrorless aps-c.

The camera is a joy to use, top marks from me.

Having experienced the same frustrations with Sony A6XXX line, I read your review with great interest.

However, my purchases of Fuji gear make me very skepticle of the XT100.

I too was very sceptical! When I purchased it I already had a Panasonic G9, 8-18, 12-60, 100-400 and was about to purchase the 50-200, also had a few m43 primes too incl the 8mm 1.8 fisheye, nice optic.. Anyway, seems a bit crazy to go to Fuji X-T100 from G9? Not really, the X-T100 beats the G9 in pure iq every single day of the week, combined with the 10-24 its a wonderful combo, it is a landscape photographers dream I would say, pure and simple it is in another league to anything I have ever owned before, images to my eye have that nice combination of sharpness and detail but with a nice natural quality but vibrancy at the same time.

The XM1 focussed 2 out of 5. Moreover the kitlens 1650 was poor.

I don't know what an xm1 is

The TX20 focussed 4 out of 5 on static daylight landscape. Still bad. The lens was OK but the X-sensor looked like watercolour when peeping.

That is sort of weird, the x-t100 outdoor focus 100% where I want it to focus in s-af, even when I press the magnification button it usually has nailed it, maybe its not perfect but miss focus outdoor with xt100 is a rare event.

From what I have seen in reviews is that the XT100 makes stunning images, if somewhat oversharpened. But every review site mentions the hesitant AF, specially in low light. Some review sites als mention laggy menu and image review.

There is no laggy menu, not sure what that is about, you do need to switch on battery boost mode though to get the best performance. In low light, how low, in a church recently I had no problem shooting iso1600/3200 at <1/10 sec, does that count as low light?

This makes me reluctrant to try the XT100 even at the latest price of €440.

Its a crazy bargain price, crazy, even if you only ever use manual focus lens I would take it over every single Sony FF currently, even with ibis!

I am used to very fast focussing cameras. Some reviewers compare to the XT1... c'mon, anything will be improvement then…

I have used the x-pro2/x-t2/x-t20 in the Fuji line and to me it seems the same. I have used the Oly em1 ii, G9/ GH5 etc etc on the m43 line, the same, in fact the x-t100 is more dependable than the G9 in my opinion. I have used the a6000 and the a6500, the latter I bought with the sigma 16 1.4 and 30 1.4, imo the x-t100 has af in s-af as good if not better than the a6500, certainly the images are better, by a long long way.

What do you think?

I think the x-t100 is one of the best sensors money can buy, I have yet to see anything that much better. I have also been using topaz ai gigapixel to re-size to GFX size, 45mp in 3:2 ratio, a quick example

Thx, I ordered the XT100! Hope I get a good one. Will give my impressions shortly.