advertisement


X100T - has it fixed all the issues with the X100S?

At risk of being banished from this forum, for the money, I'd rather have something that looks like it was manufactured this century! ;)
 
Soloist said:
At risk of being banished from this forum, for the money, I'd rather have something that looks like it was manufactured this century! ;)
Click to expand...

what like this one?

leica-t-system-banner.jpg
 
Mmm Leica. Style over substance. If you really want a laugh, there is always the new M240 limited edition. Add a couple of grand onto the already overpriced M240 and at the same time take away the LCD screen.
 
It's a very minor update. The biggest problem with the X100S is the mickey mouse sensor and a lens with serious flare issues. Neither have been improved, as far as I can tell.
 
The X100 is awesome and I shall not hear a negative word about it.

Humph!

Joe
 
cliffpatte said:
I think the sensor is excellent. The one on the X100 wasn't so good. The lens is a bit soft wide open, but that's not a big issue in most cases.
Click to expand...
Well, the sensor itself is nice; look at Nikon's D7000 and Coolpix A if you want to see it shine - especially the latter implementation, which does away with the AA filter. The processing required to get that funny RGB filter to work produces very odd results with fine detail.
 
Soloist,

BUT why the retro styling? Its gimmick being anti-gimmick!
Click to expand...
The X100 is shaped the way cameras were shaped for decades before they became ugly.

The X100's design is by no means clumsy or useless. In fact, the viewfinder -- unlike LCD screens -- actually works in bright lighting, letting you frame and compose what you're trying to photograph. It also shows you more than what's captured on the sensor, so you can better anticipate what's about to enter the frame.

Joe
 
Joe P said:
Soloist,


The X100 is shaped the way cameras were shaped for decades before they became ugly.

The X100's design is by no means clumsy or useless. In fact, the viewfinder -- unlike LCD screens -- actually works in bright lighting, letting you frame and compose what you're trying to photograph. It also shows you more than what's captured on the sensor, so you can better anticipate what's about to enter the frame.

Joe
Click to expand...
Indeed. The classic 'rangefinder' design is wonderful, both aesthetically and ergonomically. I was very excited when I received my X100S, but excitement quickly turned to disappointment as I found myself continually having to compromise my compositions to avoid lens flare, and the output from the X-Trans is very Micky Mouse.
 
Hammered,

The X100 lens hood helps a lot with flare, though I agree the lens isn't as flare resistant as I'd like.

What's wrong with the X-trans sensor? Pix that come out of the X100 look great to me. In fact, Fuji has some of the best out-of-camera jpegs I've seen.

Joe
 
ooh, don't get me started on arm's length waving around of cameras - not my bag at all! happiest with an SLR, looking at what I'm framing! Having said that, I've just bought a Olympus Stylus 1 for pocketing (and it has an EVF - which is interesting....) Can't see me changing in the long-term....
 
Joe P said:
Hammered,

The X100 lens hood helps a lot with flare, though I agree the lens isn't as flare resistant as I'd like.

What's wrong with the X-trans sensor? Pix that come out of the X100 look great to me. In fact, Fuji has some of the best out-of-camera jpegs I've seen.

Joe
Click to expand...

Really? I found the lens hood made bugger all difference to flare.

If memory serves, the X100 has a standard Bayer RGB filter instead of the pseudo-random 6x6 array. The idea of the X-Trans is that it reduces moire if you remove the anti-aliasing filter, thus giving a sharper image without false colour artefacts. In reality it's just marketing BS. The processing required to make the new filter work result in images no sharper than a D7000 with an anti-aliasing filter. And as I say, if you really want to see that Sony sensor shine, check out the Nikon Coolpix A.
 
hammered,

The processing required to make the new filter work result in images no sharper than a D7000 with an anti-aliasing filter. And as I say, if you really want to see that Sony sensor shine, check out the Nikon Coolpix A.
Click to expand...
I've looked at X100 or X100s pix without direct comparison to pix from other camera under the same conditions, but aside from some flare in certain circumstances I can't fault the output from the camera.

vzczyo.jpg


Yes, the X-Trans sensor is very Micky Mouse but then so is the sensor in the Coolpix A. :)

Joe
 
Yeah, it looks OK on DPreview - better than the Coolpix A if you're comparing JPEGs (Nikon's JPEG engine is hardly state of the art). If you switch to RAW you'll see what the Nikon can do. I'll try to post some real world samples of the X100S in landscape action later... at best, it has 'a look' about it...
 
hammeredklavier said:
Well, the sensor itself is nice; look at Nikon's D7000 and Coolpix A if you want to see it shine - especially the latter implementation, which does away with the AA filter. The processing required to get that funny RGB filter to work produces very odd results with fine detail.
Click to expand...


I was referring to the quality of the sensor on the X100 which had a 12.3 megapixel sensor, the Coolpix A has a 16.2 megapixel sensor.

As for sharpness, the killer feature of the Coolpix A is the extremely sharp lens. Try comparing an image from the Coolpix A at F2.8 to one taken with the X100S. I would expect the images to be very similar at F8, but wide open the Nikon will be sharper.
 
Cliff,

As a Nikon nerd I considered the Coolpix A, but the Fuji turned up used first. I also lurv Fuji's colours and the styling of the X100. The other issue tipping the balance in favour of the Fuji for me is the focal length. If I'm limited to one focal length, the Nikon's 28mm equivalent wouldn't be my choice. It's too wide as an all-purpose lens, at least my my pix.

FWIW, I think we're splitting hairs. Both are excellent cameras and limited more by what's behind them then what's in them.

Joe
 
Joe P said:
FWIW, I think we're splitting hairs. Both are excellent cameras and limited more by what's behind them then what's in them.

Joe
Click to expand...

Eggsackly. :)

I just love using the X100 - it's such a nice thing to hold, is very well built and just takes great photographs. Fuji hit a bulls-eye with the choice of focal length for their fixed lens too and I've rarely - if ever - found it wanting in the quality of its optics. It's also the camera which got me away from using a large DSLR.

Great too (shallow I'll admit) when I've been out and about for folk to come up and show an interest in the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top