Fujifilm X-T100 - Experience and Pics

Peter Jonas wrote:

Advent1sam wrote:

Peter Jonas wrote:

Advent1sam wrote:

Peter Jonas wrote:

Advent1sam wrote:

Fezhat wrote:

It's clumsy the tilt screen is a pest to open, touch screen a bit iffy, Bluetooth so so and...... no "happy stick"

the image results are great and easy PP with the room of light

Fezhat, not sure what your agenda is here, but this is just fake news, something not right here. The tilt screen tilts up perfectly, 99% of the time, that's how I want it, its all many many cameras offer too. I am sorry but the tilt mechanism is far from clumsy, I'd say its beautifully engineered, maybe you have a different camera, not sure!

I am not sure who's got what agenda here.

But I suspect you'd think that screen is one of the clumsiest ones if the X-T100 had an X-Trans sensor.

Peter, do you have an x-t100?

No, I do not have an X-T100. What's more, I have never seen one either, nor do I have any idea what its flip up screen works like.

Please note I am not making any claims in relation to that screen.

I just know what you think about it now, and, as I stated in my previous post, I think I have a pretty good idea what you'd think about it, if that camera had an X-Trans sensor.

Peter, no offence, but I am not going to converse further with you. I am happy to discuss with Fezhat and I would also point him to the youtuber too, where angry photographer of all people pretty much says exactly the same about the screen and its fluidity and he also has pretty big hands and he appears to have no problem flipping the screen either. Like I say, if the camera had a poor screen I would be the first to admit it, despite what you might think of me Peter, I am not in the game of spreading fake news, far from it!

It doesn't hurt if Fezhat and everyone else involved in the discussions knew that evidenced by your past record on these discussions forums, when it comes to having an objective opinion about equipment your credibility approaches zero.

Today you have an emotionally overcharged positive bias for the camera where nothing can be negative, but by tomorrow you may have a diagonally opposite view just as extreme, where nothing may be good about it.

I think it's better if people are aware of that when discussing this or other pieces of equipment with you.

Still, enjoy using your X-T100, just as much as once you enjoyed using your X-T1.

Until one day ...

There is no need to further converse with me. No offence taken.

OK, just to clarify, I have never ever owned an X-T1, maybe there is a mistake somewhere or a typo, not sure, for clarity:

I purchased the x-pro2 on release, it was the first ever Fuji interchangeable camera that I ever purchased, one of the first in the UK from wex, I loved that camera I really did, the ovf, the flat body rangefinder feel etc, it was a joy. I got some nice images, very pleased with it at the time but it was an interesting time as I maintained a m43 system at the same time too. I compared extensively the GX8, first gen 20mp m43 with it initially, I had the 18-55 2.8-4 on the x-pro2 and the 12-35 2.8 on the GX8, I felt the subject isolation was superior to m43 especially when I added the 35 1.4 and 10-24/55-200 and I prefer 3:2 ratio to 4:3, you can crop 4:3 but then you are down to 18mp. After a holiday with the x-pro2 I think things started to dawn on me in LR, sharpening etc. I was in denial, I think that is correct, it must be me! Anyway, after adding more Fuji lenses and all the while keeping m43 too I finally decided that maybe I had a bad x-pro2 copy, I became more analytical on the files, the purple grid in backlit subjects, the very harsh contrast and color cast etc etc of x-pro2 became more and more apparent, I lobbied Iridient quite heavily along with others for a pc based raw developer, xtransformer was the result! Still, I bought the X-T2 to see if it was related to x-pro2 and took the X-T2 on a holiday and again on return analysed the files. I could make the files look very good but it was hard work imo. I got the X-T20 to see if it was an option, I missed the touch screen of the m43 bodies still and decided to get one to see. I would say the x-t20 was possibly one of the worst camera decisions, compared to the x-t2 was pretty humbling experience, I took it out a few times but it went back, shortly after I went back fully to m43. Certainly I never ever intended to go Fuji aps-c again, I would of liked to with the excellent lens selection and aps-c being the sweet spot for sensor size vs lens/body size but I thought I should just be content with m43, see what happens plus Panasonic and Olympus announced some nice glass around the 2017 too. Earlier this year on a whim I bought an a6500 , aps-c/ibis/touch/big buffer/great c-af and initially 16mm/30mm 1.4, with the view to add more and more Sony lens and possibly go FF with a6500 as a back-up, I will say only one thing about the Sony a6500, never ever again either! I was very close to FF (a7r3) and have resisted many times and I am glad I did. I have a lot of experience with m43, it is a good system but for me personally as a budding photographer I feel m43 has peaked, now I have the x-t100 I think that is especially true. I don't want to lug big gear around, who does, but there is a limit to which I am willing to do that but only if I need to and the results are worth it, the 100-400 is a big lens, same as FF, but which FF gives me a 24mp 600mm lens currently the size of the 100-400? Similarly the 16-35 2.8 is a good option on an a7r3, but then  when you add in the 100-400 its all getting big big big. I do wish for a higher performance x-t100, why not, its not perfect, there are limitations with it for sure. But right now, the x-t100, 10-24,18-55,55-200,100-400 for a weight size iq ratio is up there with the best. Hope that gives some context to my buying decision and how I arrived on the x-t100, like I say I have plenty of background and plenty to compare with, if it wasn't very good I would say so.