Fujifilm xt100 still good ?

zakaria wrote:

Hello .. I would like to ask a question to those who own the XT100 and use other types of Fujifilm such as the XT20. Do you find a big difference in colors rendering and sharpness? I'm not talking about anything other than the Jpeg file. Do you think the XT100 is better? Why am I asking that because I am in the process of buying a new XT100 at a good price. I have an XT3 and I have heard a lot of talk about the traditional Bayer sensors compared to the modified Fuji ones.

I will use the camera for static things and maybe with manual lenses.

It is indeed a Bayer-array sensor, not X-trans. I had one for a little while a few years ago, and I quite liked the images out of it; can't really say better or worse than X-Trans though. It is quite basic in its features and functions, nowhere near the features and capabilities of the X-T3 (my current camera). If out-of-camera jpegs are what you're after, I'd stick with the X-T3 for its abilities to customize jpegs, severely lacking in the X-T100.

Over the years I've seen several comments about how useable its lcd design was: basically a hybrid flip and tilt screen. The camera has also been praised for astrophotography, yielding a very clean image with no baked-in "star-eating" noise reduction. While its video capabilities are low, it can render in-camera a 4k/30p timelapse video from up to 999 still images using the built-in intervalometer. The camera can also save the still image files separately from the rendered video file; the images aren't lost when the video is rendered.

Personally I couldn't recommend it as a "main" camera if you like the more classic Fuji experience offered by the X-T3, but it could indeed have its uses for certain types of shooting.