@Angst, read it in context, let me help you.
1. DPR don't produce the best images...probably a time factor in setting the camera right...hence...
2. There are some excellent Fuji shooters who will know what to do with the X70...so i'll wait for them.
3. The rest is self explanatory.

I would love the Coolpix A if the AF was faster. But then the used price would be higher.

CoolPix A died cause its a VERY SLOW camera.
everything was slow.

They gave a very good clearance price. If you got it at clearance then its
a great bargain.
Fuji X70 is at Coolpix original intro price. and is a MUCH FASTER camera.

@maximme.......with a 28mm fixed lens and you saying it was slow, please tell me, did you go shoot football?, car racing?, horse racing?, bicycle racing??

You maxes,
Ive never heard before the opinion that the coolpix is slow in operation. Care to elaborate a bit..? (I cant seem to find one in store to test myself) Thanks!

Coolpix is not slow. It is contrast detect AF system, but not slower than other cdaf systems. The face detect works very well and as a bonus it will expose just on the face which is great for high contrast scenes.

The Ricoh GR has significantly faster autofocus, after its firmware was updated. To be fair, the Coolpix A should be compared with cameras in its class (APS-C compacts)- so no Micro 4/3 for example (although a compact M/43 with 14mm f/2.5 lens will AF almost instantly.) I guess another comparison point would be the original Fuji X100, which is not extremely fast either at AF.

Ok, so mainly slower AF.
Actually, I do have a X100 ("original and best!") ;) and indeed the AF can be frustratingly slow and unreliable. More so in low light.
I recently got a RX100 (M3) to get zoom, faster AF and better video AIO. But was disappointed to find the handling is so extremely fiddly and over complicated that I often just dont bother to even try "catching the moment".. (Slow start up and lens unfolding doesnt help either.)
A quick and simple compact like the GR or this X70 would probably suit me better.

Viewfinders are a plus when you follow fast movement which does not work well with LCD screen, otherwise what you say makes good sense.

What I see from the Fuji X-sensor sample pictures, low-light capabilites are superior to the GR's. The GR is a totally nifty little thing, and I love it (bought it because the X100S was so much more expensive at the time), but as low-light pictures are a large part of what I do, I'd buy the X70 for the same price today.

Always remember loylty to a brand is the main reason new designs are introduced . As it is far easier to sell to this type of photographer.

When you compare the size of this to the GR, it's not the same. I can fit a gr in my jeans pocket. No way this thing fits. That right there is a huge difference for many with this segment. If it can't fit in a small pocket, then it might as well be any camera, because it needs a bag or a coat.

According to DPReview, the sizes are:
X70 113 x 64 x 44 mm
GR 117 x 61 x 35 mm

Not that much of a difference, I'd say. I'd like both, funds permitting (which they don't :–).

I care more about the personality of the SOOC jpg, too lazy to edit things. I still think Ricoh GR II's got the edge, but the fact that the wifi app sucks is a big let down for me.

The advantage of the x70 is the physical controls, the tilting screen that doubles as a stand, the non-retracting lens great for staying inconspicuous in the street, and better wifi app.

I'm just hoping that the image settings can be edited to spit out a jpg similar to the Ricoh GR.

jygenn - check it out at camera size.com. It's the kind of thing that on paper may seem close but holding the cameras has more feel to it.

Also let's wait of the studio samples before concluding it has better ISO than he Ricoh GR. It's the same Sony base sensor after all- most likely.

Re the size, I think it is a personal preference if the 9 mm of additional thickness bother you; it makes a significant difference if you want to pocket it in your jeans — which I rarely do, but then I'd still have gladly spared the tilting screen to save 3 mm.

The sensor is said to be the same as in the X100/S/T, which is a quite different beast than the one in the GR; see here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x100s/3
Also, on-sensor phase detection for faster AF, which the GR isn't exactly famous for.

Should have teleconverter... :-)

AbrasveReducer- better quality but not for the $$$, rather buy a nice lens for my interchangeable lens camera then waste cash on a fixed focal length camera that my phone already is, or close to it anyways.

You are so right . The phone camera is reaching its peak of perfection and can only give challenge to some users to get more creative in buying traditional cameras . As a user you have nothing to be concerned about but spare a thought for camera makers and workers .

i guess they simply used the wider dynamic range mode, then you end up with ISO400(at DR200%) and ISO800 (and DR400%) as lowest posibble ISO.

apart from that, there is basically no difference between ISO200 and ISO800 with this sensor. unless you want to push another 2 or 3 stops that is.

godiwa,
do you actually title every pic you take? :-)

One should not call others "idiot", if he does not understand, how increasing dynamic range on an "iso-less" Sony-sensor avoids blowing out highlight on an image - e.g. in the snow.

Yes - please use ISO 800, to shorten the exposure and don't overexpose the white snow... Fuji DR-modes can automatically pull up the shadows two stops where needed - or do it yourself later in RAW.
Current Sony-sensors have so much details in shadows you can use this trick without sacrificing IQ in shadows relevantly.

@Messr Britton: Do you think they're sharp? Do you see purple fringing?

Detail, possibly, but it's not sharp detail.

Some people don't understand these sample tests are not for professionals , mainly for the average user . But if an example challenges a mind to do better ..... It has done its job buy it and do better !

Except for, well, it's not.

They are ugly and taken in high ISO settings, that shows us exactly and in all detail what a mess the X-Trans sensor is.

I think they are deliberately exposed for their purpose: real world test shots.

Your philosophy of what may make a good test shot may disagree, but I think they are fine test shots.

Nahh, I stand corrected. If they want to show high iso performance, at least find real low light situation. Who underexposes and shoots high iso in broad daylight? At least repeat the same scene from iso200 to iso800 for the sake of comparison. Lenstip, photozone, all take better sample shots, they just don't provide the raw, too bad.

@Greynerd - those photos look like normal circumstances - if you never shoot with other than a mobile phone.

Kewlguy, the high ISO daylight shots are maybe fuji's DR modes. They deliberately underexpose and then apply a tone curve to bring it up and preserve up to 2 stops of highlights. It's particularly useful when you don't want to do much RAW processing.

With all the stupid things one sees in today's world, people won't even notice it.

For me, shirt pocketable means too small to handle properly. I guess it's good that cameras come in many sizes.

Haha, shirt-pocketable... in witch pocket will the pocketability category end?

if your size is xxxxxl also a D5 is shirt-pocketable:)

if you question camera bashing you didn´t fully grasp the purpose of the forums on sites like this!

@ Misspiggy, sometimes I wonder what is the purpose of the forums on sites like this? Seems as if we should discuss the merits of a particular camera or cameras v. SIMILAR cameras but but so many times people compare cameras like 1D Mark II and a micro 4/3rds or point and shoot mega zooms v. fixed lens single focal length cameras. It seems as if a lot of people on here compare Ferraris to Honda Civics or even to SUVs, both great cars but very different markets. The fanatacism is kinda weird too, as if the camera companies are sports teams or have political agendas.

Normal people are here to learn things, share things, have fun and enjoy watching how photography evolves. Not for some kind of camera worshiping cult or a holy war against sane people :)
Honestly, what do you expect? I'm reading most of the articles here, regardless of the camera brand involved and when I see (in the comments) all kinds of lies, delusions, propaganda, paranoia and ignorance, I try to 'fix' it. Some silly people just love bashing everything they don't like or understand. So what? That doesn't mean they are being paid to do it. There is no perfect camera. Just accept it and be critical, seek the truth and don't be a troll.
Good luck.

sharpness I guess.