The Official Fuji X10/X20/X30/XF1/XQ1 Thread

I posted a quick comparison of the same image of a car taken with both my X100 and X10 at identical settings which clearly shows the orbs on the X10 shot and diffused light on the X100 shot. ( post 1330)
Not too scientific and shot from behind a window, but it shows the same structure of orbs as in the DPreview test.
If the new sensor gives me the same results as my X100, I shall be very happy.
Just as long as it doesn't reduce the rest of the X10's image quality.....

Allan
 
Last edited:
allanm said:
I posted a quick comparison of the same image of a car taken with both my X100 and X10 at identical settings which clearly shows the orbs on the X10 shot and diffused light on the X100 shot. ( post 1330)
Not too scientific and shot from behind a window, but it shows the same structure of orbs as in the DPreview test.
If the new sensor gives me the same results as my X100, I shall be very happy.
Just as long as it doesn't reduce the rest of the X10's image quality.....

Allan
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm worried about, Allan. I somehow feel they have to make a compromise somewhere... Getting X100 quality with the X10 is a bit of a long shot, don't you think? The X100's sensor is in a different class, I'd say. My initial observations are as Lindsay said; is the new sensor less contrasty?
 
Is LR4 much different than LR3 in processing the raws? I don't tend to bother with raw much but if LR4 is better than 3, I might have another go.
Allan
 
allanm said:
Is LR4 much different than LR3 in processing the raws? I don't tend to bother with raw much but if LR4 is better than 3, I might have another go.
Allan
Click to expand...

It appears to be. I gave up on the X10 RAWs in LR3.

You can download LR4.1 as a pre-release candidate (free) from Adobe's site (it takes an age though). However I will say that I find LR4 to be quite slow in operation.
 
Lindsay D said:
On another subject - I've always been a JPEG shooter on the X10, I found the RAWs difficult to work with and noisy. However Lightroom 4.1 seems to do quite a good job on the X10 RAW files - has anyone else found that?
Click to expand...

I'm starting to use LR4 and the RAW files from the X10 and I really like it. The noise reduction in LR4 works really well.

I think the noise reduction in-camera on the JPEGS might be why you are finding the RAW's too noisy. The noise reduction on the JPEGS does seem to be a tad heavy handed - this is bolstered by the fact you can't turn noise reduction off on jpegs, only lower the setting.

I'm really happy using the RAW files in LR4 so you should definitely give it a go with the LR4 noise reduction.
 
Lindsay D said:
It appears to be. I gave up on the X10 RAWs in LR3.

You can download LR4.1 as a pre-release candidate (free) from Adobe's site (it takes an age though). However I will say that I find LR4 to be quite slow in operation.
Click to expand...

I have LR4 and downleaded LR4.1 as it sorts a few other issues as well.
 
Lindsay D said:
On another subject - I've always been a JPEG shooter on the X10, I found the RAWs difficult to work with and noisy. However Lightroom 4.1 seems to do quite a good job on the X10 RAW files - has anyone else found that?
Click to expand...

I don't use Lightroom (I can't get on with it) but I do use Adobe Camera Raw and CS5... The .raf files from the X10 look a little 'flat' at first but I find that they generally process ok. :shrug:
 
I bought a x10 today after listing after it for ages.

What a fantastic camera!!! Easily as good as my dslr at ISO 100 & 200...what a lens!

Unfortunately I realised it was an impulse buy and I didn't need it, so I took it back 5hrs later haha.

I wish I had the cash to just spend and keep it! Even thought about selling my d7000 to fun it (then I knocked myself on the head!).

Just wanted to share my opinion really, it is great and when I have the money, i'm going for it....again!
 
Jessops do interest free so you won't really notice you are buying it.
That's what I told myself anyway...
 
ernesto said:
Jessops do interest free so you won't really notice you are buying it.
That's what I told myself anyway...
Click to expand...

I looked on their website yesterday and it wasn't offering interest free. It was about 14%. And it didn't even ask my credit history (which is very good by the way). Am I missing something or have they stopped doing it?
 
robenroute said:
DPR have released those two "comparison" shots. If these photos where taken under identical conditions, there is an IQ difference. Apparently, a guy there has taken the pictures and put a crop from both right next to each other: http://i1016.photobucket.com/albums/af289/DIKHNFS/FX10newsensortest1.jpg

Looking at the two photos, I see a difference. A clear difference. Whether this is due to slightly different focussing/lighting/etc. or it's entirely caused by the new sensor is hard to say at this stage. But looking at the direct comparison, I'm not so sure I want to have my sensor swapped...

I really hope DPR will publish a proper comparison.
Click to expand...

One thing to note in the comparison link - the gap between the top of the ball and the bottom of the background in the old verse the new would not be sensor related - doesn’t that suggests the image was shot at a very slightly different position or a different depth of field. If this is the case it’s not like for like.
 
souldeep said:
One thing to note in the comparison link - the gap between the top of the ball and the bottom of the background in the old verse the new would not be sensor related - doesn’t that suggests the image was shot at a very slightly different position or a different depth of field. If this is the case it’s not like for like.
Click to expand...

I already posted the focus point is significantly different - hence images useless for pixel peeping comparison.
 
Phall82 said:
I looked on their website yesterday and it wasn't offering interest free. It was about 14%. And it didn't even ask my credit history (which is very good by the way). Am I missing something or have they stopped doing it?
Click to expand...

It looks like they may have stopped doing it as it was hard to miss before and now it just offers the 14.9% thing as you say.

Looks like I was lucky with my timing then...
 
Looks to me like the new sensor is a little warmer but loses a tiny bit of detail. Both shots to my eyes exhibit around the same amount of noise.

It must cost quite a lot to develop a new sensor for an existing range, I wonder if this sensor was earmarked for the X10 replacement and if so, it would make sense to dumb it down a little otherwise theres no advantage to a replacement.

Overall, it looks pretty good to me though. I don't really think it makes any difference if the original test shot of the baubles was taken from a slightly different angle, or with a slightly different focus position, those unsightly hard edged orbs are missing on the new sensor and they are not that difficult to recreate.

Allan
 
Allan - Can you help me - Please?

I bought a pack of 6 screen protectors but have found fitting one an ordeal. I posted elsewhere on the forum asking for tips and advice on fitting but comments back advise glass - like those you mentioned in one of your earlier posts. And you also had a photo of your X10 with one fitted and your new wrist strap.

Could you give me the link to where you bought from as there are so many when I do a search.

Thanks.
 
Well worth a gander at the DPReview comments.
Mostly positive - which makes a refreshing change.
But a few people moaning about losing the orbs :cuckoo:
Most of them (but not all) are tongue firmly in cheek, but my sense of humour radar probably needs an update too.

I love the comment "i'm sure Instagram will offer an Orb fiter soon"

and this takes some beating...
"Thanks, but no thanks. I have no interest in replacing the sensor in my faulty X10.
In a few years, my White Orb monster will become a special collector's item that I intend to sell for significant profit. To preserve it well, I have just ordered the Fuji leather carrying case."
LOL
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Well worth a gander at the DPReview comments.
Mostly positive - which makes a refreshing change.
But a few people moaning about losing the orbs :cuckoo:
Most of them (but not all) are tongue firmly in cheek, but my sense of humour radar probably needs an update too.

I love the comment "i'm sure Instagram will offer an Orb fiter soon"

and this takes some beating...
"Thanks, but no thanks. I have no interest in replacing the sensor in my faulty X10.
In a few years, my White Orb monster will become a special collector's item that I intend to sell for significant profit. To preserve it well, I have just ordered the Fuji leather carrying case."
LOL
Click to expand...

Loved the second one :lol:

I know you're a bit of a pixel-peeper so what do you make of the new comparisons?
 
AESamuel said:
Loved the second one :lol:

I know you're a bit of a pixel-peeper so what do you make of the new comparisons?
Click to expand...

Very encouraging!
Any differences (apart from the orbs) are so small they can easily be attributed to poor technique.
My main gripes with the images so far are different focus points and I suspect the internal flash has been used, so although the shutter, aperture and ISO are the same, the amount of illumination and hence the colour temperature have not been controlled well enough.

I'd also like to see the new texture shots at ISO 100 as the ones put up by DPReview are more a test of the noise reduction engine than sensor quality.
ISO 3200 was a weird choice for them to use given that Orbs weren't a big problem at high ISO, low ISO is where the problem was most pronounced.

We will know more when we get a better set of scenes including skin tones and high contrast landscapes.
 
DayDreamer said:
Allan - Can you help me - Please?

I bought a pack of 6 screen protectors but have found fitting one an ordeal. I posted elsewhere on the forum asking for tips and advice on fitting but comments back advise glass - like those you mentioned in one of your earlier posts. And you also had a photo of your X10 with one fitted and your new wrist strap.

Could you give me the link to where you bought from as there are so many when I do a search.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Hi, I found the clear film ones to be a bit fiddly too, although I did try an Expertshield one that was fine.
However, I prefer the GGS ones and have one on my X100 and X10, from HERE

They fit on the screen surround so there is no chance you could pull the actual lcd cover off if you ever wanted to take the protector off.

Allan
 
allanm said:
Hi, I found the clear film ones to be a bit fiddly too, although I did try an Expertshield one that was fine.
However, I prefer the GGS ones and have one on my X100 and X10, from HERE

They fit on the screen surround so there is no chance you could pull the actual lcd cover off if you ever wanted to take the protector off.

Allan
Click to expand...

Thanks Allan :thumbs:
 
For info, review of the X10 in this months Digital Camera magazine scores best in test with 5 stars and a gold award....
 
AESamuel said:
I'm starting to use LR4 and the RAW files from the X10 and I really like it. The noise reduction in LR4 works really well.

I think the noise reduction in-camera on the JPEGS might be why you are finding the RAW's too noisy. The noise reduction on the JPEGS does seem to be a tad heavy handed - this is bolstered by the fact you can't turn noise reduction off on jpegs, only lower the setting.

I'm really happy using the RAW files in LR4 so you should definitely give it a go with the LR4 noise reduction.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's very annoying that you can't completely switch off the on-camera NR.

However, using Lightroom 4 more fully today I've concluded that it's noise reduction module is a bit too heavy-handed for my tastes - even a small amount seems to leave details soft and smeared. So from now on it's going to be set at zero and all NR will be done in third party software. And I have to say when it comes to editing a whole shoot I'm finding LR4 incredibly slow in operation - frustratingly so - I'll download the latest form of LR4.1 RC and see it there's a performance improvement.

I took some indoor shots today at Petworth House, mostly at ISO 1600: http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/?p=6160
 
hmm i looked at the new/old pics at dpreview too. But i have to admit i can not see a huge difference between them (except, that the orb problem is solved) focus point is different, but that doesnt worsen on excample to the other. i am looking forward to the sensor change. but i also hope there will be more test images in the internet before i have do decide it. just to feel safe ;)
 
allanm said:
Hi, I found the clear film ones to be a bit fiddly too, although I did try an Expertshield one that was fine.
However, I prefer the GGS ones and have one on my X100 and X10, from HERE

They fit on the screen surround so there is no chance you could pull the actual lcd cover off if you ever wanted to take the protector off.

Allan
Click to expand...

I'm using the DQC160 from Vikuiti screen protector (just a thin plastic film, not a "complete cover"):

Pro:
+ Precise fit
+ No bubbles (I always struggle getting these protective sheets on without making the display look like a photo of a jacuzzi on full blast ;-)
+ Doesn't come off accidentally
+ No noticeable loss of LCD picture quality

Con:
- Price... (nearly 7 quid, if I remember correctly)

Hope this helps.
 
robenroute said:
I'm using the DQC160 from Vikuiti screen protector (just a thin plastic film, not a "complete cover"):

Pro:
+ Precise fit
+ No bubbles (I always struggle getting these protective sheets on without making the display look like a photo of a jacuzzi on full blast ;-)
+ Doesn't come off accidentally
+ No noticeable loss of LCD picture quality

Con:
- Price... (nearly 7 quid, if I remember correctly)

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your thoughts.
Looks good.
 
Before I got the GGS covers, I used an Expertshield. These can be removed and refitted( after washing) so if you mess up you can have another go. Mine fitted perfectly first time, they recommend fitting them in a damp room to reduce dust ( in the bathroom just after taking a bath / shower, is good)
It cost about £8:50 but they offered me a £5 refund if I did a review on Amazon for them......so I did
I did try a couple of Vikuiti ones on another camera but they seemed to have a mottled finish that gave the screen a moire effect when viewing images.

Allan
 
allanm said:
Before I got the GGS covers, I used an Expertshield. These can be removed and refitted( after washing) so if you mess up you can have another go. Mine fitted perfectly first time, they recommend fitting them in a damp room to reduce dust ( in the bathroom just after taking a bath / shower, is good)
It cost about £8:50 but they offered me a £5 refund if I did a review on Amazon for them......so I did
I did try a couple of Vikuiti ones on another camera but they seemed to have a mottled finish that gave the screen a moire effect when viewing images.

Allan
Click to expand...

Hi Allan,

The Vikuiti 160 I'm currently using doesn't seem to have this mottled finish, it looks rather clear to me. I can't see any moiré effects, or perhaps I'm in dire need of some specs... ;-)
 
Last edited:
Well I got to use the X10 for the first time in anger on my trip to Marrakech and I was really pleased with the results!

I have popped the photos up for C+C here:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=403992

Here is my fav shot just to entice you to look!

7122454253_c4f9cdeb1c_z.jpg
 
still having fun with mine too :)

sister in law's dog

DSCF1618.jpg


DSCF1653.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top