Fujifilm xt100 still good ?

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.

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.

The XT100 is as good as it ever was and the XT3 won't make a "better" image.

There are probaly slight differences, but this is neither better nor worse.

So do a YouTube search for X-Trans sensor differences - there are probably a thousand videos like this:

https://youtu.be/yF790-vReJU

Then when you're fully confused, just go buy whatever camera you prefer using and forget about it.

WeirdSheep wrote:

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.

Most criticisms of the X100 were about it's speed of operation when it came out, these have long since been resolved. It's no speed demon but I don't have any issues with AF speed personally, it's just not as zippy as more modern cameras. In terms of IQ, it has it's own subtle rendering, I find the colour to be excellent and it's particularly good for black and white in my experience. The lens is also exceptionally sharp from F2 onwards, it's a bit softer for close up semi macro stuff but that's no issue to me either. All in all I still love mine to bits, it's the only camera I've ever bought twice ( I regretted selling the first one so bought another ). The sensor is good up to ISO 3200 in colour, 6400 in black and white. Enjoy it when it arrives, it's cracking camera whose images completely hold up for large prints, no problem, despite 'only' being 12mp.

Thank you so much for your time and your experience about " X100 " .it is really informative though I was talking about " XT100 ".

WeirdSheep wrote:

zakaria wrote:

WeirdSheep wrote:

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.

Most criticisms of the X100 were about it's speed of operation when it came out, these have long since been resolved. It's no speed demon but I don't have any issues with AF speed personally, it's just not as zippy as more modern cameras. In terms of IQ, it has it's own subtle rendering, I find the colour to be excellent and it's particularly good for black and white in my experience. The lens is also exceptionally sharp from F2 onwards, it's a bit softer for close up semi macro stuff but that's no issue to me either. All in all I still love mine to bits, it's the only camera I've ever bought twice ( I regretted selling the first one so bought another ). The sensor is good up to ISO 3200 in colour, 6400 in black and white. Enjoy it when it arrives, it's cracking camera whose images completely hold up for large prints, no problem, despite 'only' being 12mp.

Thank you so much for your time and your experience about " X100 " .it is really informative though I was talking about " XT100 ".

Apologies, I misread your post, though I'm sure what I said equally applies, none of these 'old' cameras were ever anything other than excellent, though you did mention a bayer sensor, and the XT100 is X-trans.

Thank you again. I think it is Bayer sensor as xf10

WeirdSheep wrote:

zakaria wrote:

Thank you again. I think it is Bayer sensor as xf10

The XT100 is definitely X-trans, the only bayer sensor X100 is the first one.

This is the problem with similar camera names!  I think you're thinking of the X100t.  The XT-100 is an entry level camera with the same Bayer sensor as the X-A5.

sprouty115 wrote:

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.

The XT100 is as good as it ever was and the XT3 won't make a "better" image.

There are probaly slight differences, but this is neither better nor worse.

So do a YouTube search for X-Trans sensor differences - there are probably a thousand videos like this:

the xt100 is not xtrans though

https://youtu.be/yF790-vReJU

Then when you're fully confused, just go buy whatever camera you prefer using and forget about it.

Fz2000user uk wrote:

sprouty115 wrote:

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.

The XT100 is as good as it ever was and the XT3 won't make a "better" image.

There are probaly slight differences, but this is neither better nor worse.

So do a YouTube search for X-Trans sensor differences - there are probably a thousand videos like this:

the xt100 is not xtrans though

https://youtu.be/yF790-vReJU

Then when you're fully confused, just go buy whatever camera you prefer using and forget about it.

And it’s functionally garbage now.  So many early xtran cams that are and were so much better.

rla1022 wrote:

Fz2000user uk wrote:

sprouty115 wrote:

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.

The XT100 is as good as it ever was and the XT3 won't make a "better" image.

There are probaly slight differences, but this is neither better nor worse.

So do a YouTube search for X-Trans sensor differences - there are probably a thousand videos like this:

the xt100 is not xtrans though

https://youtu.be/yF790-vReJU

Then when you're fully confused, just go buy whatever camera you prefer using and forget about it.

And it’s functionally garbage now. So many early xtran cams that are and were so much better.

I stand by my point that it was as good as it ever was and regardless of whatever sensor it has that is no reason to discount it.

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.

Lettermanian wrote:

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.

Thank you so much. It is very helpful and informative reply.

I have been a fujifilm user since the great and last fujifilm dslr X pro 5 .and from XE1 to xt3 . I shoot  only jpeg. I noticed that x-trans sensors are more badly effective on jpeg files. Files tend  to have  a  plastic fell. Details are absent when zooming pictures.

-- hide signature --

"Be yourself. No one can say you're doing it wrong." -Charles M. Schulz
"I love mankind... it's PEOPLE I can't stand!!" - Linus

I think it will be fine for your intended use of static shots.

Image quality is very good but it’s a bit laggy and af is very pedestrian.

I just got a new in the box with kit lens £499 today

Fz2000user uk wrote:

Image quality is very good but it’s a bit laggy and af is very pedestrian.

I just got a new in the box with kit lens £499 today

Mine will arrive tomorrow. It is new also body only 300$

-- hide signature --

It’s all about the zoom

zakaria wrote:

Fz2000user uk wrote:

Image quality is very good but it’s a bit laggy and af is very pedestrian.

I just got a new in the box with kit lens £499 today

Mine will arrive tomorrow. It is new also body only 300$

A good price.