Fuji x100

Can you compare the two in IQ in low light Ian?

You got a bargain too btw. If I hadn't already ordered, mine I'd have jumped at the chance. Although the silver looks glorious, black looks a bit less eye catching for when your out and about.
 
drb5 said:
Although the silver looks glorious, black looks a bit less eye catching for when your out and about.
Click to expand...

And hopefully the black x100 looks enough like the black XP1 that my wife doesn't notice!

I'll look at low light quality next time I get the chance. I took some shots at a bonfire night party with the XP1 and 18mm and was astounded at the quality. AF was pretty decent too.
 
Funny you should say that Ian. I bought my black x100 first then my
Leica M. Don't think my wife has noticed the difference, at least not yet !

C
 
ernesto said:
It will be your OSX. The raw updates are made to the OS and used by Aperture and iPhoto etc,. I'd be surprised if Apple are still updating 7.5.
Click to expand...

No, the X100 Raw was supported in 10.6.8 (see http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3825), so the probem is something else...

BTW you may be able to process the Raws by running them through Adobe's free DNG converter, and then importing the DNGs into Aperture. This works with the X10, although the results with my totally inexpert Raw processing are woeful compared to Fuji's own JPEGs.
 
ChrisR said:
No, the X100 Raw was supported in 10.6.8 (see http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3825), so the probem is something else...

BTW you may be able to process the Raws by running them through Adobe's free DNG converter, and then importing the DNGs into Aperture. This works with the X10, although the results with my totally inexpert Raw processing are woeful compared to Fuji's own JPEGs.
Click to expand...

I tried that and it wouldn't recognise the files, in the end I download Picasa :gag: and then exported them as jpegs to import into Aperture - all this for a couple of fireworks


DSCF3133 by Jen (255), on Flickr
DSCF3141 by Jen (255), on Flickr
DSCF3151 by Jen (255), on Flickr
DSCF3153 by Jen (255), on Flickr
DSCF3167 by Jen (255), on Flickr
 
Exactly, 7.5 is not 10.7 or later so it will not be applied to 7.5 which is why it is not working. The OS would need to be updgrade to 10.7 for it to work.
 
ernesto said:
Exactly, 7.5 is not 10.7 or later so it will not be applied to 7.5 which is why it is not working. The OS would need to be updgrade to 10.7 for it to work.
Click to expand...

Aha, I see where you're coming from! However, the actual MacOS 7.5 was in use in about 1995-8, and certainly won't run on today's computers (other than in emulators). Aperture could not run on 7.5, period. The current version of MacOSX is Mountain Lion, 10.8; immediately previous was Lion, 10.7, and before that Snow Leopard, 10.6 (that I still run). The latest version of Aperture that will run on 10.6 is 3.2.4. So when Iris wrote:

I have Aperture 3.4.3 on Max OS X v 7.5....
Click to expand...

It's clear she meant 10.7.5.
 
Well it maybe clear to you, but wasn't to me - clearly :)

Maybe the OS has not been updated to receive that patch as strange that it doesn't work.

Iris,

Are all your software updates up to date and if so does the raw file open in iPhoto?
 
ernesto said:
Well it maybe clear to you, but wasn't to me - clearly :)

Maybe the OS has not been updated to receive that patch as strange that it doesn't work.

Iris,

Are all your software updates up to date and if so does the raw file open in iPhoto?
Click to expand...

Sorrrrry OSX 10.7.5

Yes they are all up to date but no, they don't open in iPhoto, Aperture or PSE 10 :thinking:
 
Iris said:
Sorrrrry OSX 10.7.5

Yes they are all up to date but no, they don't open in iPhoto, Aperture or PSE 10 :thinking:
Click to expand...

I guessed you would have 10.7.5. Just update the digital camera raw file in the link in my previous post (#1797) and you should be fine. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ceejay said:
Funny you should say that Ian. I bought my black x100 first then my
Leica M. Don't think my wife has noticed the difference, at least not yet !

C
Click to expand...

It's not just me then. I managed to covertly replace my Olympus epl1 with a Leica X1 successfully, but I am sure my wife does the same with handbags and shoes!

Allan
 
I'm still amazed by the quality of photos being posted on this thread.........keep 'em coming folks :clap::clap::clap:

Some from me:

1.

Gosport and Portsmouth by Keith Burton, on Flickr

2.

Spinnaker Tower at Dusk by Keith Burton, on Flickr

3.

Arun Fruiterers & Florist by Keith Burton, on Flickr

4.

Rolling your own by Keith Burton, on Flickr

5.

Curvy by Keith Burton, on Flickr

I just love this camera:love: I have the X10 as well, but since I got the X100 I hardly ever use it.......and it will probably have to go. I usually shoot in JPEG and find the quality superb.
 
Keith. Just brilliant mate. I recognise the door. I live in Guildford.
 
allanm said:
It's not just me then. I managed to covertly replace my Olympus epl1 with a Leica X1 successfully, but I am sure my wife does the same with handbags and shoes!

Allan
Click to expand...

Me and my wife are past the stage of caring what each other buys. We are both as bad as each and we know that so have a good harmony going on with purchases and don't ask about them :)
 
Ajophotog said:
Cracking stuff Keithy. ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks Alby

Lee_weir said:
Nice images crusher!

I like #1 a lot, did you use the panorama mode in camera? If so how did you avoid the stitching lines i seem to get plagued with!?
Click to expand...

Thanks Lee. Yes, I used the in camera pano mode (120 degree) I've taken a few now and never had a problem with stitching lines. Mind you I try only to take panos where the light is pretty much the same across the scene. I also use the camera in portrait mode rather in landscape mode when doing the pano. Seems to work better.

trevorbray said:
Keith. Just brilliant mate. I recognise the door. I live in Guildford.
Click to expand...
Thanks Trevor.......I was with the Missus - she shops and I hang about waiting for her!

davekiddle said:
Nice shots Keithy boy. I love no.4 :clap:
Click to expand...
Thanks Dave.


One more:


Stars 'n' Stripes by Keith Burton, on Flickr
 
Noticed a few people on here getting refurb'd x100 for £460. £499 on Fuji website, what's your secret?
 
Jump said:
Noticed a few people on here getting refurb'd x100 for £460. £499 on Fuji website, what's your secret?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing they are using a 10% discount code.

Google:-
x100 discount code refurb*

first hit gives discount code
P258BTCC467

:)
 
Now, to buy a lens hood online or wait 3 weeks until I'm in Hongkong?!?

Any views on the aftermarket ones on eBay/amazon etc as the fuji one seems a little steep..
 
JJS hood from amazon is just fine - I use it and it looks the part on the camera.
Also comes with the filter adapter so that you can use 49mm filters with the camera.
 
Yes, all cameras take pictures. However, they can all be very different to use so it depends how much that matters to someone. If you can't do without a viewfinder the RX100 is not much use, if you can't live with a fixed focal length the X100 is not much use and so on.

The X100 is still fairly expensive for what it is and doesn't provide shots that are any better than an entry level DSLR I have owned. However, it is much more nicely made...
 
drb5 said:
I keep reading the X100 still gives the best quality shots for what it is and price-wise, but obviously it still has it's "quirks".

Everyone also says the X100 isn't comparable to the RX100, as it's a different camera. :rolleyes: They take pictures, so imo you can compare them. I can't compare them however as i haven't ever used one. :D
Click to expand...

I think you can only compare the fact that you can take pictures with them. They are totally different otherwise. X100 has a hybrid ( electronic and optical viewfinder and an ƒ2 fixed lens and a retro look.
RX100 has no viewfinder at all. An ƒ1.8 lens with 3.6x zoom and a 1" sensor ( I believe the Fuji X100 sensor is 3 times this size)
Allan
 
Last edited:
allanm said:
a 1" sensor
Allan
Click to expand...


Is there any measurement system more confusing than the way camera manufacturers measure sensors?

The rx100 sensor is 13.2 x 8.8 mm, with a diagonal of 15.9mm. How is that an inch sensor? And to complicate things further, some sensor sizes are expressed in a mix of decimal and fractions... eg pentax q is 1/2.3". Now i'm not too bad at mental 'rithmetic, but how can you compare sizes when expressed in such an arcane and incomprehensible format! :bonk:

Perhaps i should add this to the pet hates thread....
 
I've used my mate's RX100 a little bit and own an X100 so have a little experience to pass on.

The way I see it is that if all you care about is the final output, the RX100 is unbeatable as a compact. It's easy to use, well made and properly compact.

If you care a lot about the tactile process of capturing the photo in the first place, the Fuji starts to make a lot more sense. In realistic terms, IQ is probably the same for both cameras but you have to work a bit harder with Fuji I feel. The Sony also gives you this option but I get the the impression that the Sony was designed with automatic use in mind with manual use possible where as the Fuji seems very much the other way around to the point that fully automatic use is actually quite fiddly.

Though I'm almost ashamed to admit it, a big part of the Fuji's appeal to me was also the looks. If you fall for the looks and the tactility of the camera, you almost make irrational excuses to own it. It's nice that it's also a decent camera as well, despite some short comings. It's certainly not all style and no substance.

The Sony is so impressive that I really want one. It's too much money for me to do anything about it but if I were to get one it would be to replace my Canon S90 rather than the X100. That might sound daft as there are clear cross overs between the two, but I'd use an RX100 when I just want a camera with me on the off chance and the X100 or DSLR when I want to take photos for pleasure.
 
Rapscallion said:
Is there any measurement system more confusing than the way camera manufacturers measure sensors?

The rx100 sensor is 13.2 x 8.8 mm, with a diagonal of 15.9mm. How is that an inch sensor? And to complicate things further, some sensor sizes are expressed in a mix of decimal and fractions... eg pentax q is 1/2.3". Now i'm not too bad at mental 'rithmetic, but how can you compare sizes when expressed in such an arcane and incomprehensible format! :bonk:

Perhaps i should add this to the pet hates thread....
Click to expand...

I get lost with them too. Perhaps this link will help explain sizes more for those can be bothered to look..

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sensor-size-explained-with-sample-photos-17813

But, as we all know, size isn't everything, its what you do with it that matters...... ;)

Allan
 
A square mm number would be helpful rather than m4/3, APS-C, full frame etc, as it would be more obvious what the sometimes big differences in size are.
 
ernesto said:
A square mm number would be helpful rather than m4/3, APS-C, full frame etc, as it would be more obvious what the sometimes big differences in size are.
Click to expand...

That's just too sensible!
The link above shows the area in mm2 of all the sensor sizes.

Allan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top