Reading mode: Light Dark

More X100 samples

Go to last post
T

Te0

Well-known member
Messages
166
Reaction score
171
Location
Vancouver, WA, US
 
Hi Slava Nikulin,

Thank you for providing these.

Take care,
Huy
 
Thanks for forwarding these.

The colors are nicely Fuji with what looks like a tendency to underexpose a little bit (which is good for me - it looks more like slide film to me). I'd say it's a bit more S2-ish in look than S5-ish, which in my estimation is better for non-people photography.

Macros are surprisingly soft (almost fogged) as are some other non-macro shots.

Definitely see quite a bit of blow-out - does not look to have the DR quoted, and certainly not S5 levels.

B&Ws have some really nice DOF (or lack thereof) and frankly are more impressive in many ways than the color. That fits well with what will probably be used in a very Leica-like street photography mode...

Wish the price was lower, I'd definitely like one. Can't justify $1200+ for a very cool but niche camera. Hopefully prices will drop in the future.

--
Matt Fahrner
http://boinkphoto.com
 
boinkphoto said:
B&Ws have some really nice DOF (or lack thereof) and frankly are more impressive in many ways than the color. That fits well with what will probably be used in a very Leica-like street photography mode...
Click to expand...
I also like B&W better than color samples - great tonality and mild contrast. Color samples are too "digital" and sterile IMO. Bokeh is not bad but somewhat underdeveloped compared to Leica glass.
 
EXIF data are stripped.

Somebody already at least resized the images for the web.

Hardly classifies as "OOC JPEGs"...
Slava Nikulin said:
from aiharap.exblog.jp - low / high ISO, color and B&W.
Impressive for OOC Jpegs!

http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15480379/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15499722/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15497602/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15496384/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15492590/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15490131/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15489938/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15486502/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15486344/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15486316/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15480318/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15472450/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15472354/
Click to expand...
This two galleries apparently are not X100:
Te0 said:
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15461290/
http://aiharap.exblog.jp/15455700/
Click to expand...
 
These look nice. My local shop just started advertising that the X100 is "Coming Soon."
 
Hello boinkphoto,
boinkphoto said:
Macros are surprisingly soft (almost fogged) as are some other non-macro shots.
Click to expand...
I noticed that too. I wonder about the mechanics/optics behind that.

Take care,
Huy
 
I've changed my mind. I think anyone who believes these pics to be of acceptable quality go out immediately and blow spend $1200 on this camera! ;)
 
これも全てjpegとって出しです
If I remember my Japanese correctly this means that they were shot in jpeg mode.
"Kore mo ma(?)te jpeg totte deki(?)shi desu: These were also shot in Jpeg."

But its been 20 years since I've lived there, my Japanese is rusty.
Anyhoo if this is OOC jpeg then I am happy:

http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/201102%2F13%2F34%2Ff0050534%5F872784%2Ejpg

But really now I'm ready to just try it out in my own hot little hands :)
Cheers
Crystal
--
http://www.crystalkeesey.com
 
To my eye the dynamic range exhibited in X100 files, once Fuji's hallmark feature, really sucks in this iteration. I see lots of blown highlight.

Second, the fixed lens is not sharp at all. I've seen samples from several sources now, and so we can't chalk it up to individual user error. This camera's lens is soft. That's odd as this lens was made specifically for this body and was supposed to deliver professional quality images. (isn't that one of the reasons for a fixed lens as opposed to interchangeable lenses according to Fuji?) Sorry, but a soft lens is not a professional tool.

Third, most images (especially the monochrome images) are very lean and flat looking IMHO, moreso than what one normally sees from any professional DSLR. I understand the arguements for allowing greater latitude for post processing but generally not to this degree OOC. Something's not right yet. Maybe Fuji is rushing it to market.

This is a personal opinion. If this camera were food, and I was Alton Brown, I'd have to say that the X100 ain't good eats!
 
ACB, Just went to your web site and wanted to congratulate you on a very nice set of images and personal style. Some of what I mention above regarding deficiencies I see in the X100 probably wouldn't apply to you. Your work and style is more fine art really up to and including no need for an ultra sharp lens. I was speaking for the masses who for whatever reasons, commercial application primarily, still require eye splitting sharpness in their work.
 
Hawaiian Punch said:
To my eye the dynamic range exhibited in X100 files, once Fuji's hallmark feature, really sucks in this iteration....

Second, the fixed lens is not sharp at all. ...

Third, most images (especially the monochrome images) are very lean and flat looking ....

This is a personal opinion. ....
Click to expand...
Show of hands, how many people knew three months ago that Hawaiian Punch wasn't going to like the sample images for the X100? I sure knew.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelthek/
 
You can't tell much at all from the samples posted so far. They're out of camera jpegs, no idea of the image parameters, probably all hand held. I'll wait for the raw images shot on a tripod, bracketed. Anyone that tries to convince you that they can tell the lens isn't sharp, the sensor lacks dynamic range etc etc is essentially talking out his (rear) blow hole.

If the lens MTF published by Fuji is accurate, this lens will be one of the sharpest moderate wide angles ever produced.
Faintandfuzzy said:
acrystalball said:
for us lesser mortals in the dark
thanks
crystal

ps, not baiting, i am legitimately curious
--
http://www.crystalkeesey.com
Click to expand...
I don't see anything from these photographs that would make someone think the camera is not of high quality. The photographs look great.
Click to expand...
 
y211gbo said:
You can't tell much at all from the samples posted so far. They're out of camera jpegs, no idea of the image parameters, probably all hand held. I'll wait for the raw images shot on a tripod, bracketed. Anyone that tries to convince you that they can tell the lens isn't sharp, the sensor lacks dynamic range etc etc is essentially talking out his (rear) blow hole.

If the lens MTF published by Fuji is accurate, this lens will be one of the sharpest moderate wide angles ever produced.
Click to expand...
If this camera/lens doesn't perform very well, then Fuji, for all intents and purposes, will be dead in the water with professionals. Fuji is laying their reputation on the line by setting expectations very high for the image quality of this camera, the quality of the lens especially. I suspect we won't be disappointed.
 
Get your hands on the published MTF curves for this renowned lens. The Fuji's published MTFs are better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top