8 replies to this topic

[EOSHD]

As a stills camera I liked the Fuji X100 - it was an actual die-hard photographic tool with gorgeous good looks in a sea of plastic consumer gadgetry. However the terrible AF and fly by wire manual focussing technology spoilt it, and the video mode was very much an afterthought. Fuji have taken steps to address all of this with the X100S getting a significant upgrade under the familiar retro style casing.

[jgharding]

It is a bit of a trend to leave out advanced video specs isn't it? As if today's "prosumer" understands everything about stills -- from dynamic range to codec noise -- but understands nothing of in-depth video specs, and will be impressed by FULL HD printed on the front...

 

Not only is this untrue, but it's harming sales, I feel. Even those I know whom I never expected to be interested in advanced video specs, quiz me these days about low-light performance and manual mode.

 

Everyone has a story to tell. And very few people like to be patronised...

[Steven Phipps]

I was hoping you would speak on this camera here. I m in love with the idea of it. I ended up selling my gh2 and splurging on a d800. the stills are amazing and the video is pretty damn nice, but i like to shoot street stills and video, often times places theres just no way i could walk around with a giant D800, id look like dinner to folks. Didnt realize this until i had it in my hand and realized i just cant be discreet with this behemoth. I really want a large sensor pocket cam. This Fuji sounds incredible for stills, lets hope its at least serviceable for video.

[theSUBVERSIVEBIRDS]

I was kind of waiting and expecting that the Fuji 1080p60 36mbps topic would get here in EOSHD, I'll look forward for the test when the new Fuji cameras are released.

 

______________________

 

 

I'm not so sure about choosing RX1 instead of the X100s, will the cost-benefit worth it? The X-Trans sensor is very good and the best APS-C sensor, the image in ISO6400 is very nice and usable. I mean, at least, image wise, I'm not so sure the cost of the RX1 would really top it to be worth more than double the price. I think that the RX1 is a bit bulkier with the lens but the body of the X100s is wider, it's a matter of choice.

 

About video, I also don't know but I would give the benefit of the doubt. As you said yourself, questioning why would Fuji give the X100s the second generation EXR processor instead of the X-E1. I also find it a bit strange, they could really have waited but at the same time, I think that it would have killed the X100s since the X-cameras will get a 23mm lens, making the X-E1 less attractive.

 

But more importantly for me, it shows that Fuji is always All In, it won't hold back in any model. If you think about that, lots of companies would have waited more to give the X-E1 the same sensor as the top of the line X-PRO1, fearing for cannibalizing its own PRO line up, but instead, Fuji not only gave the same sensor, but also brought a firmware update addressing some problems. And now, the X100s, full of improvements. This is 180 degrees from what Canon has been doing, for instance and as such, kudos for Fuji.

 

So maybe the video won't be there with something like the Sony's - which is soft but not bad overall - but it just shows a commitment from Fuji, which is something Sony has been lacking, mainly about lenses for their cameras. This shows to me that although they may not get everything right about video this time, they are showing effort and when the next generation comes to the interchangeable lens line up, it will be a lot closer and maybe even surpassing Sony's codec. And that's what would make me buy a X-E2, for example. They have the IQ, the lenses and possibly a decent enough video - plus, the X-lens 18-55mm zoom has OIS and a good aperture for a zoom.

 

______________________

 

 

About the other topic "RX100 vs X20", again, I'm not so sure the RX100 is that much superior. Now, besides all the speed, the X20 has a X-Trans sensor as well, if we upscale the pixel density, if would give us something like a 32MP X-Trans APS-C sensor, double the pixel density of the sensor used in the X-PRO1, X-E1 and X-100s. If we do the same with the RX100 sensor, we would have a 36MP Sony APS-C sensor. So far, in ISO comparison tests, the X-Trans sensor beats the Sony's sensors - both the 16MP, which is a bit older, but also the 24MP -, the images are sharper, the DR, etc.

 

So IQ wise, the X20 may beat the RX100. The RX100 may be a bit faster at f/1.8 in the wide end, but loses lots of light at the tele end, while the X20 keep it at f/2.8. The RX100 is a bit smaller, but not so much. The video would be the same as I said before, it may or may not at the same level.

 

So i think it's very close and Fuji can even get the best of it.

 

______________________

 

I've to say I'm quite impressed with the innovations that Fuji is bringing in each new camera from their X-cameras - X-Trans sensor, split focus, Hybrid VF, etc - but even more importantly, how they have been listening to their consumers feedback, fine tuning their cameras, making it faster, adding focus peaking, making it better and better.

 

The leaps Fuji is taking are bigger than other companies. Panasonic and Olympus keep improving their system but they don't take risks, they are not as bold as Fuji is with its innovation, they do innovate, but in small steps at a time. But I liked how they pushed the AF speed and proved that contrast AF can be quick, Panasonic even got rid of the hunting focus, making it quick and smooth, even more in video. Olympus and it's 5-axis IBIS, it's very nice, looks like a steadicam. And of course, Panasonic bringing better video for photo cameras.

 

Sony has its ups and downs, they may bring some nice things but at the same time they do things I cannot understand, like the NEX-6 not having touchscreen - they claim that the NEX-6 wouldn't want that, but sometimes touch shutter can be very handy, plus, now you have apps - or the fact that the NEX-5n should have received a dial for a better control, they didn't have to wait another generation to do that. And Sony is about to start - I hope - to give some fast primes for E-mount. But I think that the SLT tech is a bit of a waste now that you have hybrid AF inside the sensors, it makes you lose light for nothing. When it first came up, it brought some pros of DSLR and mirrorless cameras at the cost of 1/3 of the light and a DSLR-size, but now, it doesn't really make sense to have it.

 

Samsung is still trying to figure it out how to put together a good camera, but at least they have a nice diversity with their lenses, but with some ups and down in terms of quality. Nikon is doing something of their own, when I think about it, I wouldn't buy a Nikon1, but in a weird way it's a system that brings feats that a big DSLR doesn't have, making it a good pal for the PRO FF cameras, at least that is what I think Nikon is doing with a smaller 1" sensor - and of course, they are gathering info and know-how about mirrorless cameras. Because at first I thought the Nikon1 was a total nonsense. Well, Canon has been doing that very, very conservative moves with little to no innovation at all and there is an article about that right here in EOSHD talking about that.

 

Anyway, I hope all this competition keeps pushing the overall improvements of the cameras.

[kitchentable]

I arrived (very) late to X100 party so an announcement of a replacement with so many improvements so soon after I'd bought mine would normally piss me off but to be honest I'm having too much fun with this camera to care !

 

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[foxytom]

I'd be very interested to see moiré performance on this baby

[marike6]

I was kind of waiting and expecting that the Fuji 1080p60 36mbps topic would get here in EOSHD, I'll look forward for the test when the new Fuji cameras are released.

I'm also glad the Andrew decided to write about the two new Fuji X cameras as they are both high on my list for next camera purchase. 

______________________

 

 

I'm not so sure about choosing RX1 instead of the X100s, will the cost-benefit worth it? The X-Trans sensor is very good and the best APS-C sensor, the image in ISO6400 is very nice and usable. I mean, at least, image wise, I'm not so sure the cost of the RX1 would really top it to be worth more than double the price. I think that the RX1 is a bit bulkier with the lens but the body of the X100s is wider, it's a matter of choice.

I haven't shot with the RX1 yet, but clearly it has one of the best FF sensors available, scoring just below the D800 and D600 on DxOMark, no small feat (of course it's likely that the RX1 and D600 share the same 24p Sony sensor).  As far as X100s vs RX1, I think the built in OVF/EVF of the X100s make it a nicer, more compact package.  As far as AF performance, the X100s with PDAF should provide significantly better tracking and low-light AF than the RX1 at least on paper.   For me, since I already own a FF DSLR, the D800, a high quality (and less expensive) mirrorless like the X100s makes more sense.  If I had a larger budget for a second camera it's likely that I'd choose the X100s, but then if money were not an issue, I'd probably have already pre-ordered the Leica M.  

 

As far as comments below re: the X20 vs RX100, I've used both the X10 and RX100, and clearly the RX100 has a great sensor, and superb video quality, but for still photography, there are several things that make the X10/X20 a nicer camera to use:  

 

• the X20's VF (which will be even better with the X20 as it has shooting data).  Composing on an LCD is not difficult except in bright sun, but the shooting stance with arms stretched out in front of you is not very stable at all.  As with run & gun DSLR video shooting, the extra point of contact of the VF against your face is extremely important. 
• better macro ability (I was somewhat disappointed with the RX100's macro abilities)
• much prefer the manual zoom, which is just faster and more precise for applications that require speed like street photography. 
• high ISO performance is not all that different.  If I remember the DxOMark scores, the RX100 score 390 ISO, similar to the Nikon V1, and the X10 254 ISO, the best of any compact other than the RX100.  Not a huge difference.  
• With the removal of the OLPF, the X20 should be capable of superb resolution
• the f4.9 at the long end of the RX100 actually removes much of the DOF advantage that the 1" sensor of the RX100 provides vs the 2/3" sensor of the X20.  

Lastly, the Fuji colors for me are a huge advantage for the X20.  Anyway, this was an exciting announcement and upgrade from Fuji and one or both the X20 or X100s will definitely find a way into my camera bag.  Thanks, Andrew. 

______________________

 

 

About the other topic "RX100 vs X20", again, I'm not so sure the RX100 is that much superior. Now, besides all the speed, the X20 has a X-Trans sensor as well, if we upscale the pixel density, if would give us something like a 32MP X-Trans APS-C sensor, double the pixel density of the sensor used in the X-PRO1, X-E1 and X-100s. If we do the same with the RX100 sensor, we would have a 36MP Sony APS-C sensor. So far, in ISO comparison tests, the X-Trans sensor beats the Sony's sensors - both the 16MP, which is a bit older, but also the 24MP -, the images are sharper, the DR, etc.

 

So IQ wise, the X20 may beat the RX100. The RX100 may be a bit faster at f/1.8 in the wide end, but loses lots of light at the tele end, while the X20 keep it at f/2.8. The RX100 is a bit smaller, but not so much. The video would be the same as I said before, it may or may not at the same level.

 

 

[CoolColJ]

First look at the video mode of the X20 and X100s

Jump to 8:00 mark

Only 60p at 1080 and no manual controls for the X20. Does do 480p at 80fps, and 320x240@150fps and 320x112@250fps

X100s gets 1080 60p 30p and manual controls - sample footage looked good, very colourful

 

[CoolColJ]

Sample X100s video at the bottom of this page - 1080 30p

http://www.photograp.../sample_images/

 

Aliasing and moire galore!

Jello too