Fujifilm X100V review: The most capable prime-lens compact camera, ever

For landscapes you can use ANY lens. Limitations on glass for nature is ricockulous. Some of my best selling work for landscape images were shot with the 200 2.8Lii

At one time Nikon was rumored to be on the verge of releasing a fixed lens, wide angle zoom 1" sensored camera. I knowany were disappointed when that product was cancelled.

The GRIII's fault is not the lens. The problem is the poor AF, lack of dust sealing, terrible battery life, lack of a viewfinder, no fill flash and incredibly slow FPS.
But the lens is pretty good, though not as good as the faster 35mm on the X100v. As for the Sony RX100 VI, I still use it and it can actually focus! But for now I'm shooting mainly with the Nikon Z7 II, which replaced my D850.

The new sensor on the x100v have a terrible yellow cast and highlight rolloff that weren't present in the previous model and the lens isn't sharper than the gr wide open.
While the sony files have the same quality as any flagship phone.
You talk as someone that never used the camera, and I don't undestand why you bash it while praising the x100v. You kept talking about how the rx100 is so much better because it has a zoom lens instead of a prime.

At the same time right now you are complaining that it doesn't have dust sealing, the x100v have dust resistance with a lens cap, not dust sealing, you can also add dust resistance to the gr lens with the new nisi filter adapter without increasing the size too much.
While the sony doesn't have neither dust resistance nor the capacity to add an adapter, it also doesn't have a hotshoe for external flash.

The sony viewfinder is also smaller than the hotshoe OVF that you can buy for the Ricoh. Also you have fast charging with the usb-c

And it seems that you don't know the main strenght of the GR series.
The main selling point of the GR models isn't af performance, it's how fast it is to pickup, turn on, and capture a moment while using it with one hand.
You have 3 custom settings in the dial where you can have 3 different settings for zone focusing with 3 different snap focus distances, while the 28mm is wide enough that you can capture any scene that you don't have time to compose and crop later. I wouldn't be able to capture a lot of the scenes I stumble upon while driving with any of the alternatives.
Just yesterday I was driving and saw this old guy with a hat fixing a sidewalk in the 4 seconds it took to pass by him at 40mph I managed to pickup the camera, turn it on, and get the shot, while one handed and using only my periferal vision.

I've owned all of these cameras. I kept the Sony RX100 VI as a compact travel camera to keep aboard our cruising sailboat. And no, my new smartphone seems to lack the focal range of the little Sony. Not only that, but we actually used the Sony on a gimbal for a commercial test shoot because the video and AF work so well, ideal for confined spaces. On my GRII and GRIII I had both OVF models and they were clunky and inaccurate. In bright sunlight it's nearly impossible to see the rear LCD of the GRIII. My wife gave up on it for that reason alone. It's not a proper camera without being able to compose and see settings easily. And again, the AF is very weak. I have no idea why people make excuses for a feature that we've all come to expect. They also killed off the internal flash, which was very useful for shooting people at moderate to close distances on the GRII. The main strength of the GRIII, which I did like, was the fast start-up.

The Fuji X100v has won virtually every comparison test with the GRIII. The lens is faster and sharper. It shoots FAR faster and has superior ergonomics and an amazing viewfinder. It handles like a real camera and is nicely sealed with a simple screw on filter that has no effect on the size.
If there's a "yellow cast" to the sensor, it's sure not showing up on anyone's sample photos, but then I shoot RAW, so I can control colors as required. Again, the Fuji is absolutely sharper than the GRIII wide open at F2 and has superior contrast. Look at the YouTube and online reviews, all saying the same thing.
But the Ricoh costs a lot less and is much smaller, so it has a niche. I just don't think they've done enough to make it a more rounded product. The lack of state-of-the art AF is just criminal for the price. I do most of my shooting with my D850 and Z7II. Toy cameras are mainly for fun, but the GRIII wasn't good enough to keep. I'm happy that yours works well for you. +1 for choices!

No glaciers in the UK, not much snow either. Sorry.

hopefully we can all travel soon

"I really dont get the point of a compact camera that needs a tripod anytime I want to do video."
This is not a good camera for video, that is just thrown in there probably because the chips support it. I think the consensus for most X100S/T/F users is that they don't use the video feature.

This is a specialty camera. Who is buying Panasonic's GH5 to shoot stills?

What I love about fixed lens cameras like this one is the leaf shutter. Being so silent means I dont need to use the electronic one that has so many problems (artifacts with some light sources, rolling shutter effect..). I can use the flash up to 1/4000th shutter speed! ..allowing the built-in flash to have far more range than with the 20-times-slower sync speeds of focal plane shutters of interchangeable-lens cameras.
Im not interested in video though. If I was, I guess I would pick another camera.

I don’t think Q2 would have significantly better IQ.

For roughly $2,400, or $1,000 more, and no OVF, I don't think you can draw an equivalence with the X100V. While I would never diss the Sony, image quality is more than just sensor size. It's also about the ability to compose the image, and that process is different when an OVF is in the mix.

The Rx1R is $7-800 less than the X100v, that will be enough for many.

Even in the US, the first RX1R without the EVF isn't that cheap.

Never had dust on my Fuji cameras. I recently checked my X100F and it is fine. All fixed lens cameras are at risk but there are legendary dust catchers like the Ricoh GR line. I love those little Ricoh cameras but buyer beware. I own two of the RX100 line (original and the IV). No dust issues with either after years of shooting. I admit to being careful with my gear but sometimes that isn't enough.

The OG x100 images are indeed magic. However having owned both xtrans and bayer sensored x100s it's hard to tell the difference in everyday use. I'm not sure I could tell the difference. Additionally the Contrast Detect AF on the original was absolutely atrocious in low light. Its basically a focus and recompose camera.

Olympus has smaller sensor and there is difference in noise levels, tonality, depth of field and color science. Some people don't see it but I can see it clearly. Video and af is also better on Fuji. Want cheap with option to change lenses you can buy X-T30. Olympus wins on IBIS only.
As for Canon M6II, Fuji still is a better choice. Better video, much better lens selection (X-T30), better sensor (dynamic range, high iso) and I would argue about AF as well.

IBIS is a moot point. I have bodies with IBS and without, I hardly ever use IBS unless I am shooting handheld at night which is very rare. I don't shoot video either. It's a cool feature, but I much prefer lens based IS. And yes there is a rather large difference Steve between m43rds and Fuji, I am sorry to tell you this, but you just have to come to terms with it.

For small body size combined with a small price, there is the Canon M200 with 22mm lens.

Nikon DL. Oh, i pray Nikon will resurrect the DL line.

Cameras that are the size of the LX5 are too small for me. The X100V is small enough with usable controls and an integrated viewfinder. My first digital camera was a Nikon Coolpix 8400 and it was a very nice size with a surprisingly usable grip.

I usually carry such cameras in a tiny fanny pack. The X100V will fit in any pocket I would want to use to hold a camera.

@User5397822823
If you want that small of a camera, use your phone. This is a professional camera, for people looking to create professional photos.

David, that doesn't make any sense if you take a minute and think about it.

You can charge the battery via USB3 cable while inside the camera from any suitable charger, including mains or battery pack, or you can buy a mains charger that requires the battery to be removed from the camera. The latter method is preferable if you buy extra batteries and swap them out.

What doesn’t make sense? Please explain.

So, Fuji expects me to have the camera unusable while it charges from a USB charger they don’t even supply? Is there at least a USB C cable in the box?

This penny pinching on chargers, while prices skyrocket, is getting ridiculous. I’m mildly interested in an X100V, and would be a new customer for Fuji, but this really puts me off.

@David - It doesn't make sense that Fuji wouldn't include any way to charge the camera. The X100V comes with a USB cable.

@David Mantripp, you can use the camera while it’s being charged with an external charger In the field and most people logically bring more than one battery If they plan on shooting all day.

That wouldnt be for me. ;-) Different product.

Of course you can use an add-on OVF with the Ricoh. I have one (Voigtlander). *** You are right, the 100V can do more tricks, I don't deny that, but the fact remains that it's $500 more than the GR III and $800+ more than the quite good and still available GR II. Thing is, the things the 100V can do that the GR III can't do are available on models with interchangeable lenses that compete directly with the 100V at the price point. I think it makes sense, if you can afford it, as a second camera, but I question it as an only camera in terms of value.

I'm not sure that people who are looking at the value proposition or versatility of an ILC were ever the target market anyway, a lot of people seem to shoot X100s in addition to an ILC system anyway, and I imagine those looking for a do it all camera would buy one with a zoom regardless. If you're looking to cross shop vs an ILC anyway you should probably add the price of a decent WR lens as well tho.

I wouldn’t buy a camera without an EVF. “ Versatility and value“ is 100% subjective.

Yeah I'm a bit surprised at the comments, as for phones I checked out the iPhone 11 sample galleries, why would anyone serious about their photography choose and iPhone over an X100. The iPhone pics are mushy at ISO 200.
Now I'm not saying one can't shoot great pics with an iPhone but a decent camera has got to be a better choice if it is possible to carry one.

The shining wits of DPR - the gift that never stops giving.

@DrewRick Not wide open - the leaf shutter cannot move fast enough to cover the wide open aperture above 1/1000. It's a limitation of all leaf shutters.

And that's why you get that ND filter inbuilt. Also, higher base ISO does not help here.

The IQ and rendering character of the RX1/R series would cast a shadow over the X100V.

...I'm biased, I know.

What about the XE series? Sounds like exactly what you're looking for, especially once they update it with the new sensor and AF.

@Bernie Lowe
Size, this is one area that I feel mirrorless is a bit of a let down.
I had hoped that mirrorless was going to move to the direction of more compact lightweight systems.
I have DSLRs and I wanted a second lightweight set up to travel with, walk around with and to complement my DSLRs. I was hoping we would see small lenses like my Voightlander 35mm f2.5, lenses like the Leica 2.5 summarits that was the future I was hoping for from mirrorless systems.
Trouble was most wanted mirrorless to replace the DSLR and wanted all of the heavy f1.4 lenses to go with it. Thats the future we ended up with big lenses on ever growing bodies.
I bought the X100 the original one. I'm glad I did, I've really enjoyed using that camera. I bought though because it only has one lens and an optical viewfinder thats it, easy to use nothing extra to buy. It's the digital replacement for my old Canonet.
Continued below:----

Man, people buy the x100 because of it's fixed leaf shutter lens and some people here want to change that? Wow.

I have the x100 since it's T iteration and it is an awesome and (despite maybe the AF speed) a perfect camera for my family and me.

Now micro 4/3 does offer some really small stuff the GM1 and GM5 were probably the smallest bodies. I picked up a GM1 with kit zoom when they were on close out sale. Embarrassed to say it was so small I lost it during a night out. I got another used a while ago that how much I liked it. The standard 25mm f1.8 but olympus is really small and light and if I remember there is a small 45mm f1.8 also that is very small.
You might find what you are looking for in micro 4/3s because you don't want fast lenses so likely don't want that really shallow DOF.
Take a look at what is available in micro 4/3 you might be surprised that you can find something.

@Dan:
XE is a good call, but there still aren't tiny lenses like the X100's. Maybe i just wanna see more pancakes...

@Stujomo:
Yes, i am looking into MFT also. I like the X100's hybrid finder though.

@kreislauf:
What's wrong with interchangeable leaf shutter lenses? I'm not suggesting sacrificing anything. I'm suggesting adding.

So you want a Pentax Q digital? Or 110?
Great, you and like 9 other people on photo forums. Should be a huge success for Fuji unlike the X100..oh nevermind.

Bernie, the X-Pro is the ILC version of this camera.
Remember that the X100's lens is physically inside the body in the way that separate lenses couldn't be. Fuji isn't going to make a third version of their lenses so the f2 primes are the smallest you will get.

The X00 is aimed at people who want that kind of camera. The XE sounds like what you want. The body is very close to the same size, so all you are really asking for is the lenses in you list to fit an XE.

@DGP:
I take it you mean that the glass is inside the body, as opposed to, of course, all mounts being inside bodies. Yeah, that's fine. I'm saying I'd like Fuji to make pancakes for this body. It could be a new mount for Fuji, that's fine with me.

For a camera like this I'd prefer 28mm. Then 24mm, then 20mm before i choose 35mm. But I'd really like to be able to pick any of those lengths, or others, before leaving the house. And the form factor would need to be the same-ish.

Fuji could totally do that. Really, anybody could. And the first to release such a pancake-based MFT or APS-C system will go gangbusters!

The whole premise of permanently-attached fixed-focal-length lenses is a false one. I can't wait to see a pancake system.

With mirrorless bodies lenses can go so deep into the body they can be less than 1 mm away from the shutter if that was a good idea.
Even Nikon had a lens that went so far into the body of an SLR that one would have to lock the mirror up on the Nikon F before attaching the lens.
It would be perfectly possible for Fuji to release a compact lens like the lens on the X100 to use on their mirrorless bodies but they may not want to or it may not be cost effective to do so. It maybe that the leaf shutter would not be possible though. The option for leaf shutter lenses would likely have to of been planned right from the very beginning.

@Bernie "The whole premise of permanently-attached fixed-focal-length lenses is a false one. I can't wait to see a pancake system"

It's not a false premise its a camera and it's real.

That would defeat the point of this camera

It's not a "stupid blunder." It's just not what you want it to be.

The really great pancake lenses across several current mirrorless systems (noting that there's usually only 1 or 2 per) seem to have their focal length linked in some way to the flange distance of the mount (and the format size). I think once you start straying too far from that key FL then the whole design becomes more and more compromised (slower lens, worse optics, worse AF, or all of the above), might be why you don't see more MILC pancakes.

@Bernie- the flash of the X100V works fine if you use the default built in lens. In fact, it's one of the best "natural light" flashes in the market. You can also using the leaf shutter shoot with it with very high speed sync.

I am sorry but your comparison with a Nikon D5600 lower end camera with a kit lens that is going to be slower and less quality than the prime is ludicrous. These are two different pieces of equipment. The Nikon doesn't have a hybrid EVF/OVF either nor is it offering the option of weather sealing.

The Sony is a 1'' sensor camera. And not the same type of camera at all. I am not sure the lens prime F2.0 propositin/APS-C is being understood here.

Yes, something for nothing. That's what you seem to want.

By the way, not saying that Sony is a bad camera, but I think the proposition/use case/ image quality , range of operation needs to be understood here. The Sony while a zoom is doing an F2.8 - F4.5 lens with a 1'' sensor. The Fuji is giving you an F2.0 prime lens 35mm equiv, with an APS-C sensor. Capable of adapting for wider and a bit longer with no light/fstop loss. From the Sony to the Fuji there's like 2 stops apart. And that Sony like all Sonys not FF models they have does lossy raw only.

It's a nice little Camera, but you don't see the Sony going for $700 for good reason. Same with the Fuji.

To invoke the overused analogy once more, the fact that cheap four door cars exist doesn't mean minivans or pickup trucks are useless to those who know why they need then.

@Bernie - I said it can be used as a professional Camera. There’s some pros that have done exactly that.

Again just becuase it doesn’t work for you (or me) doesn’t mean it can’t be used for that. It’s ok that it doesn’t work for you just like it’s ok it works for someone else. Why are these two things mutually exclusive for you?

"Lol, yes we can. That's what this whole area, even DPR itself, is about, lol."

ok. My 600€ washing machine is better than the X100V or RX10 IV, because those don't wash clothes. Lol.

Is that too much to ask, Yes! Like you said, it's perfect! Perfection can't be improved!