x10 compared to x100

[Gordon L]

My buddy who shares studio space with me just bought an x10.

First impressions, compared to the x100, very much a relative, smaller, better ergonomics with a built in thumb grip, feels great in the hand. Viewfinder, better than anything in it's class, but optical only, no frame lines, no information..not even focus point. MUCH faster to turn on shoot quickly. Image quality pretty impressive, for a small sensor compact, though not a match for the x100.

Very impressive. I'll stick with the x100, but if you're looking for a compact with a zoom, this is the one.

 

[photo perzon]

Yes if you are looking for a compact with a zoom

But is the X10 a compact?

The Olympus XZ-1 at $399 and 10 ounces is 30% lighter and smaller than X10 (13oz), and with a little light it does as good as the X10. You can carry the XZ-1 in a pocket, whereas the X10 you lug in a pocket. And for purists, if you put the Oly VF2 viewfinder on, the 1.5 meg LCD will allow you to keep your glasses on as you change options in the menu.

Yes the X10 is the king of low light compacts, but that is the weakness of compacts.

The XZ-1 raws are good at high ISO and come out good out of the camera.

All small sensor compacts will not do as well indoors as the X100 (16 oz), Leica X1 (11 oz), Sony 5N (8oz with 16mm), 7, Samsung NX200 (9oz with the 30mm f2) with their full sensors which are 4 times larger.

But the X10 is fun to use and hold.

It has the blob problem still, the XZ-1 is older and debugged.

Both X10 and XZ-1 have excellent skin tones. Both have impressive zoom range. Xz-1 has better IS, but X10 better high ISO.

My buddy who shares studio space with me just bought an x10.

First impressions, compared to the x100, very much a relative, smaller, better ergonomics with a built in thumb grip, feels great in the hand. Viewfinder, better than anything in it's class, but optical only, no frame lines, no information..not even focus point. MUCH faster to turn on shoot quickly. Image quality pretty impressive, for a small sensor compact, though not a match for the x100.

Very impressive. I'll stick with the x100, but if you're looking for a compact with a zoom, this is the one.

 

[skimble]

I just went to both cameras, first the X10 now the X100.
You can't really compare them but like always we like to do things like that.

I was very happy with the X10 the zoom was more than I expected and none on the X100 but then again for my majority of my shooting I don;t need zoom. I still can buy a super zoom if I want to pray on birds or other wildlife.

The X100 its much easier to operate and get superb results while the X10 is fun to operate and when you get the results it rewards you equally if you are not a big poster seize printer.

The X10 is much sexier than the X100 but the X100 gives you this superb O/EVF while the X10 is just good for emergency.

When I brought the X10 back (due to dust on the sensor) I had a look at the Oly E-PL3 which would have cost me the same then the X10 including EVF and has a focus speed both Fuji would dream of

in the end its up to the taste of the individual I like the Fuji colours and even so Oly is good it is not as good as the Fuji IMHO

If you after a advanced camera which challenges you gives you good IQ the X10 is the best camera right now, the X100 is double the price and for sure better IQ but it really does not matter if you are in for the fun.

 

[Jon Rty]

Well, it all comes down to definitions. Personally, I don't see either the XZ-1 or the X10 as pocketable, so to me the size difference is a wash. Heck, I've never had my S90 in a pocket, I don't like the bulge. And once it's not pocketable, what's more important is if you can easily carry it in a bag and in your hand all day. I'd say both qualify.

Then, when you look at the performance, you'd expect the X10 to easily trump the XZ-1. It has a sensor that's 25% larger and much newer, so I'm expecting it to show better DR as well as SNR. And it has better handling due to the grip, controls and OVF as well as manual zoom.

Yes if you are looking for a compact with a zoom

But is the X10 a compact?

The Olympus XZ-1 at $399 and 10 ounces is 30% lighter and smaller than X10 (13oz), and with a little light it does as good as the X10. You can carry the XZ-1 in a pocket, whereas the X10 you lug in a pocket. And for purists, if you put the Oly VF2 viewfinder on, the 1.5 meg LCD will allow you to keep your glasses on as you change options in the menu.

Yes the X10 is the king of low light compacts, but that is the weakness of compacts.

The XZ-1 raws are good at high ISO and come out good out of the camera.

All small sensor compacts will not do as well indoors as the X100 (16 oz), Leica X1 (11 oz), Sony 5N (8oz with 16mm), 7, Samsung NX200 (9oz with the 30mm f2) with their full sensors which are 4 times larger.

But the X10 is fun to use and hold.

It has the blob problem still, the XZ-1 is older and debugged.

Both X10 and XZ-1 have excellent skin tones. Both have impressive zoom range. Xz-1 has better IS, but X10 better high ISO.

 

[simplicitywins]

I've recently returned an X10 because of viewfinder dust and then ended up with an X100 instead since there were no X10 replacements available from amazon. I've been frustrated because I have had to accept that there is no single camera that can be everything I want, and the trade-offs of any single camera don't feel acceptable. For the foreseeable future, I will need two cameras.

My ideal main camera:

• X100 form factor and size/weight and manual controls
• small, bright interchangeable lenses of high quality
• An AF system and overall performance that equals a modern DSLR like my D300

For me the X100 can easily be my main camera, despite its known limitations. I need a camera that can provide excellent image quality for portraits, people and everyday captures on the street day and night. The X100 is perfect for that despite it's fixed lens - it just requires/demands that I unlearn my lazy zoom habits and become more interactive with my surroundings. And that's a wonderful and fun thing! I've been learning this camera for just two days, but it does something to me that no camera has done before: it makes me feel like I'm using my old manual rangefinder Contax G1 but with the all the advantages of digital.

The X10 was great too, but the OVF really wasn't worth much to me. I wouldn't have used it except occasionally in emergencies, so I asked myself the question why I would buy it over the LX5 or XZ-1 or even the tiny S100. There's little point in having a larger compact like the X10 with a viewfinder if you don't use the viewfinder. Sure, the X10 has nice manual controls and the manual zoom is really nice, but the X100 is similar in design with lots of additional benefits: overall image quality, low light performance, the excellent hybrid VF and DOF control. If I need a portable camera for snapshots and flexibility/zoom, I can get a much smaller package than the X10 that will produce equally good results in most situations. When I need a high quality image with amazing low light performance and DOF control, the X100 is ultimately a better tool for me.

Just some early reflections on these two cameras...

 

[minim3]

I've got an D700 with a lot of glass, so im lookin for something small for everyday...

I've had the Lx-5,which i only liked at daylight,and i found the RAW awefull...

sold it and picked up a NEX3 which IQ is really impressive i lreally like it, but its not really compact as a almost always got my nikkors on it...

I had the x10 for a few shots and i really loved the concept...im thinking of swapping my nex for a x10....im not quite sure what to do....
--
My flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/_gman_/

 

[steven2874]

All small sensor compacts will not do as well indoors as the X100 (16 oz), Leica X1 (11 oz), Sony 5N (8oz with 16mm), 7, Samsung NX200 (9oz with the 30mm f2) with their full sensors which are 4 times larger.

I believe the Sony NEX-5N with the 16mm F2.8 "pancake" weighs 12 oz. Not the 8 oz. you state. Also this 24mm equivalent wouldn't be acceptable to most users as an all-around "normal" lens. Also the Samsung NX200 body alone weighs over 12 oz.

 

[Fullframer]

All small sensor compacts will not do as well indoors as the X100 (16 oz), Leica X1 (11 oz), Sony 5N (8oz with 16mm), 7, Samsung NX200 (9oz with the 30mm f2) with their full sensors which are 4 times larger.

I believe the Sony NEX-5N with the 16mm F2.8 "pancake" weighs 12 oz. Not the 8 oz. you state. Also this 24mm equivalent wouldn't be acceptable to most users as an all-around "normal" lens. Also the Samsung NX200 body alone weighs over 12 oz.

Sony NEX C-3 with the pancake weighs around 10.5 oz. Yes the 24mm equiv may not work for everyone, but it does make the Nex a nice compact portable camera with great IQ indoors no flash, something that X10 suffers at with it's puny sensor.

 

[AmbientMick]

Lots of pointless replies. Small sensor vs large. X100 is better doh!! Oh and the viewfinder ...

--
---------------------------------------------
Regards,
AmbientMick
http://www.michaelstringer.co.uk
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelstringerphotography/

 

[steven2874]

Lots of pointless replies. Small sensor vs large. X100 is better doh!! Oh and the viewfinder ...

--
---------------------------------------------
Regards,
AmbientMick
http://www.michaelstringer.co.uk
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelstringerphotography/

Yes, and I'm adding your brilliant comment to the pointless replies, doh!!!

 

[Brooks Lester]

The X10 is more versatile with its zoom range and focussing modes and among the very best compact cameras in IQ. X10 image quality is surprisingly good for its sensor size - nice dynamic range, tonality, and malleability of files in post. The X100 is at least a stop better with high ISO performance and has better resolution - no surprise.

Lenses on both of my cameras are very sharp with plenty of contrast. The X10 lens is nicely resistant to flare and ghosting - it's only there when you want it. The X100 flares quite readily - more than I would like. The X100 hood doesn't help much in real world use. I like to shoot against the light and use flare and ghosting for effects but I don't like the flare characteristics of the X100 - they aren't particularly pleasing compared to other lenses.

I personally feel that the X10 is a more useful camera for many shooters. The X100 requires a more deliberate and measured approach due to its fixed focal length and basic focussing modes.

I love them both and they have very similar jpeg color rendering and superb auto white balance behavior - perhaps the best feature of these Fuji cameras. These are the only cameras I shoot jpeg - its RAW for my D700, E-PL3, and LX3.

Like another poster in this thread, I used to own an LX5 but sold it as I was never happy with its color, both in jpeg and RAW. The LX3 looks great in RAW so it's my only "pocket" cam at the moment. I tested an S100 for a week but found its slow lens and slower operational speed didn't work for me. It's a great camera in most other regards.

Some X10 shooters are reporting "white orbs" in blown out specular highlights. I haven't seen them with my copy, after a week's worth of shooting, but certain users are very unhappy with their cameras. Before I bought my X10 I decided that the camera seemed to be good enough despite this potential issue and I'm glad I made that decision.

I shoot mostly candids with both cameras so AF performance is important. Non-candid shooters might not be interested in the rest of this post.

X10 focussing is faster than the X100 but most importantly to me, Face Detection and Recognition are major advantages over the X100, and these modes work very well for me. I would place the X10 focussing speed as being similar to that of the Olympus E-PL3, which is thought to be one of the fastest focussing CDAF systems on the market.

My X100 focusses plenty fast but its lack of any tracking mode makes it functionally slower and less reliable for candids than either an advanced DSLR with tracking AF or a compact with effective face detection/recognition and quick focussing speeds.

Focus and recompose doesn't work well with moving subjects compared to other methods and modes. Yes, F&R can be used and will yield some keepers, but the hit rate is going to be lower.

I found the best X100 focussing method for candids is to place the focus sensor in a rule of thirds area for traditional comps and frame so that the subject's leading eye is covered by the focussing sensor.This is the same way I initiate tracking focussing with my D700 but the D700 will of course track from its original focus point selection.

With the X100 I get fast and reliable focussing with this method but I am constantly changing the focus sensor position as comps are changing from left to right nose room and portrait to landscape orientation. As I wrote above, a more deliberate approach is necessary with the X100.

On the X10 I simply set Face Detection and let the camera acquire my subject's face. My X10 achieves focus quickly and accurately. Tracking occurs and I can constantly change my frame to get the best composition and subject lighting.

Hope this helps.

 

[Bender73]

the X10 is a great P&S. better for most people. the X100 allows more experienced shooters to create art, simply for more manual control. also, the big sensor in the X100 is clearly obvious. i had an X10 briefly.
--
http://www.chrisbilodeauphotography.com
D700, D300s, D7000, X100

 

[smatty]

and I agree with all of your observations. I would add though, that the X10 just feels better and tighter. The exposure compensation wheel actually stays in place and the shutter button has a solid resistence to it while the button on my X100 feels like Jello in comparison.

The X100 also clearly wins the shallow dof and bokeh comparison, but the pro focus function and 100mm f/2.8 focal length of the X10 can also produce a better shalow dof than the other compact cameras that I have seen so far.

And another surprize was that the X10 does feel quite a bit more compact in my hands although side by side the difference between the two cameras does not appear to be that big.
The X100 is a neck strap and the X10 a hand strap size camera for me.

Cheers,
Smatty

Homepage => http://www.PhotosdeLux.com
Recent Flickr Photos => http://www.flickr.com/photos/internationalphotos/

 

[Cass_Rimportant]

I had the same problem with my Nex-3 - it always had my Nikkors on it. It was okay with the 35 1.4 AI or 50 1.2 AI-S, but a little comical with the 85 1.4 AF-D or the Samyang 14mm. The larger lenses just feel so much better balanced on an SLR. The Nex-3 was fun for awhile but I ended up trading it in toward my X100, and I don't regret it one bit.

 

[Riprap]

The X10 has similar IQ to an Fuji S5 in EXR mode, is pocketable (in my pockets) especially compared to the Panasonic G10 and pancake that my X10 replaces (My summer pockets hold a Ricoh GDR).

I wasn't expecting the cam to be as usable, quick or up to the image standards of the Panasonic. I have been wrong on all counts.

 

[Fullframer]

My buddy who shares studio space with me just bought an x10.

First impressions, compared to the x100, very much a relative, smaller, better ergonomics with a built in thumb grip, feels great in the hand. Viewfinder, better than anything in it's class, but optical only, no frame lines, no information..not even focus point. MUCH faster to turn on shoot quickly. Image quality pretty impressive, for a small sensor compact, though not a match for the x100.

Very impressive. I'll stick with the x100, but if you're looking for a compact with a zoom, this is the one.

I don't really consider the X10 a compact. Furthermore, $599 for a small sensored camera that isn't that small, no thanks.

 

[Fullframer]

The X10 is more versatile with its zoom range and focussing modes and among the very best compact cameras in IQ. X10 image quality is surprisingly good for its sensor size - nice dynamic range, tonality, and malleability of files in post. The X100 is at least a stop better with high ISO performance and has better resolution - no surprise.

Lenses on both of my cameras are very sharp with plenty of contrast. The X10 lens is nicely resistant to flare and ghosting - it's only there when you want it. The X100 flares quite readily - more than I would like. The X100 hood doesn't help much in real world use. I like to shoot against the light and use flare and ghosting for effects but I don't like the flare characteristics of the X100 - they aren't particularly pleasing compared to other lenses.

I personally feel that the X10 is a more useful camera for many shooters. The X100 requires a more deliberate and measured approach due to its fixed focal length and basic focussing modes.

I love them both and they have very similar jpeg color rendering and superb auto white balance behavior - perhaps the best feature of these Fuji cameras. These are the only cameras I shoot jpeg - its RAW for my D700, E-PL3, and LX3.

Like another poster in this thread, I used to own an LX5 but sold it as I was never happy with its color, both in jpeg and RAW. The LX3 looks great in RAW so it's my only "pocket" cam at the moment. I tested an S100 for a week but found its slow lens and slower operational speed didn't work for me. It's a great camera in most other regards.

Some X10 shooters are reporting "white orbs" in blown out specular highlights. I haven't seen them with my copy, after a week's worth of shooting, but certain users are very unhappy with their cameras. Before I bought my X10 I decided that the camera seemed to be good enough despite this potential issue and I'm glad I made that decision.

I shoot mostly candids with both cameras so AF performance is important. Non-candid shooters might not be interested in the rest of this post.

X10 focussing is faster than the X100 but most importantly to me, Face Detection and Recognition are major advantages over the X100, and these modes work very well for me. I would place the X10 focussing speed as being similar to that of the Olympus E-PL3, which is thought to be one of the fastest focussing CDAF systems on the market.

My X100 focusses plenty fast but its lack of any tracking mode makes it functionally slower and less reliable for candids than either an advanced DSLR with tracking AF or a compact with effective face detection/recognition and quick focussing speeds.

Focus and recompose doesn't work well with moving subjects compared to other methods and modes. Yes, F&R can be used and will yield some keepers, but the hit rate is going to be lower.

I found the best X100 focussing method for candids is to place the focus sensor in a rule of thirds area for traditional comps and frame so that the subject's leading eye is covered by the focussing sensor.This is the same way I initiate tracking focussing with my D700 but the D700 will of course track from its original focus point selection.

With the X100 I get fast and reliable focussing with this method but I am constantly changing the focus sensor position as comps are changing from left to right nose room and portrait to landscape orientation. As I wrote above, a more deliberate approach is necessary with the X100.

On the X10 I simply set Face Detection and let the camera acquire my subject's face. My X10 achieves focus quickly and accurately. Tracking occurs and I can constantly change my frame to get the best composition and subject lighting.

Hope this helps.

The X10 is a camera for less experienced snapshooters that don't know how to use a prime lens or know about depth of field etc.

 

[Brooks Lester]

Maybe you should have checked out my gear list before you posted - I have three cameras that have larger sensors than the X10 - and I own an X10.

I get the DOF control thing with the larger sensors. I also can't fit my D700 and 24-70AFS in my coat pocket. The X10 has a surprising amount of DOF control for its form factor. Its appeal will likely include folks with larger sensor cameras - like me - who want a small camera with superb color, a sharp lens with nice range, and a reasonable amount of DOF control. There are already several reviews online that emphasize this camera's appeal to the larger format shooter who is looking for a smaller camera that still allows some creativity and control. Luminous Landscape and Steve Huff, for example, have well-done reviews on the X10. Of course, it can't duplicate what a full frame sensor camera can do with DOF control - and neither can the X100.

However, high end compacts like the X10, LX3 and 5, and XZ-1 function as pocketable or nearly pocketable cameras for many people with larger systems. The XZ-1 and the X10 have big enough sensors, fast and relatively long lenses, and can defocus backgrounds to a surprising degree for their size.

Due to its price, the X10 is not going to be very popular with casual shooters.

In terms of DOF control, the X10, with its fast lens, can create shallower DOF than a m4/3 body with it slow kit lens.

X10, f/2.5, zoomed in only to about 60mm. The foliage is about 3 feet behind the subject and it's obviously defocussed compared to the critical focus on the subject.

That's exceptionally shallow DOF for a pocketable camera. If you look at the upper left corner you can see some foliage that is around 20 feet in back of the subject - it's quite defocussed - and bokeh "discs" are being generated.



X10, f/2.8, around 85mm equivalent. I see defocussed lights in the background, with smooth bokeh for a such a small camera:



At full zoom, even shallower depth of field will be realized.

 

[Brooks Lester]

Long end of the lens, 112mm equivalent, camera is about 3 feet away from the chandelier and the tree is approximately 20 feet away from the camera.

Image stabilization is on - I shot this handheld. As it is, I'm quite happy with this amount of defocussing from such a small camera. Oh yeah, and Happy Holidays!





Yes, I know the date is wrong on the image file. I just set the correct time.

No, it the X10 can't do this:



or this:

 

[frelwa]

You have my votes for

• cutest kids

• most creative use of orbs!

--
Merry Christmas ~ Joyeux Noel