Fuji XS10 looks good

[stratokaster]

It's a pity Fujifilm doesn't have a single lens that is optically as good as cheap 25mm offerings from Olympus and Panasonic, never mind their top-tier glass.

 

[Richard_M]

I’ll certainly have a look at this camera later in the year when the sales start again. In hindsight I should’ve bought the X-T4 instead of the E-M1 III. For me the difference between the E-M1 II and III is negligible.

 

[shreebles]

interesting but no weather sealing means I am still looking at the E-M5iii (no OLED evf on the E-M1ii and I want OLED now on) - however, this new Fuji means I am not getting an E-M5iii if the price does not go even lower than my pre-XS10 limit of 1K eurodollars, it now stands at 900.

Consider the fact that there are no XS-10 on the used market. I found a second hand M5 iii for 650 that should get here next week. It's only a few months old and should have plenty warranty left.

 

[demiro]

It's a pity Fujifilm doesn't have a single lens that is optically as good as cheap 25mm offerings from Olympus and Panasonic, never mind their top-tier glass.

What does that really mean? Are you talking about the 25/1.8? I love that lens, especially given the low price, but to say that Fuji doesn't have any options that are as good as it? Just not true, imo.

 

[pdk42]

I toyed with Fuji some years back when I bought a used XE1 and the 35mm f1.4 lens. I won't comment on the body's performance and features since it's a pretty old model. However, what I can say is this:

- The 35/1.4 lens was an optical gem. Lovely OOF rendering and plenty sharp enough for most things, esp portraits. Focus was a bit slow, but I could live with that.

- The 16Mp xtrans sensor delivered great results on skin etc, but it didn't work so well on foliage, esp if you wanted good detail on distant trees etc.

- LR at the time didn't work well with the raws. Greens were hard to get right and if you tried to up sharpening to fix the foliage detail problem you could easily get worms.

- I found that there was definitely some baked-in NR in the raw files that couldn't be turned off. It led to apparently better high ISO performance than the EM5 I compared it to, but the detail wasn't there. Cranking up the NR in the Oly got it pretty close.

- I didn't get on with the aperture-control-on-the-lens approach. Being someone who ran a Pentax 35mm film system back in the day I was surprised by this, but l think PASM is arguably a better control system in principle. Aperture dials seem a bit of a throwback that appeals to nostalgia but not practicality.

Net, net - I didn't dislike Fuji, and in fact thought their lenses were very good, but it didn't add a lot over m43 in my view and came with some downsides. Of course, Fuji have moved on much more than m43 in sensor tech since then, so perhaps that's not so true these days. But I still don't understand why they persevere with x trans!

 

[pdk42]

Im sure a lot of dry happy Fuji X owners would disagree

Yes, but I contend there is no demonstrable advantage that it brings. As I posted above, if it is in principle better, why didn't Fuji use it on the GF range? Or that no other manufacturer uses a non Bayer design? It's a marketing gimmick IMHO.

 

[Robstar1963]

It's a pity Fujifilm doesn't have a single lens that is optically as good as cheap 25mm offerings from Olympus and Panasonic, never mind their top-tier glass.

I have no experience whatsoever with their shorter primes but my experience with the 50-140 f2.8 is at odds with your comment
That was one of the sharpest lenses I’ve used

 

[Robstar1963]

I toyed with Fuji some years back when I bought a used XE1 and the 35mm f1.4 lens. I won't comment on the body's performance and features since it's a pretty old model. However, what I can say is this:

- The 35/1.4 lens was an optical gem. Lovely OOF rendering and plenty sharp enough for most things, esp portraits. Focus was a bit slow, but I could live with that.

- The 16Mp xtrans sensor delivered great results on skin etc, but it didn't work so well on foliage, esp if you wanted good detail on distant trees etc.

- LR at the time didn't work well with the raws. Greens were hard to get right and if you tried to up sharpening to fix the foliage detail problem you could easily get worms.

- I found that there was definitely some baked-in NR in the raw files that couldn't be turned off. It led to apparently better high ISO performance than the EM5 I compared it to, but the detail wasn't there. Cranking up the NR in the Oly got it pretty close.

- I didn't get on with the aperture-control-on-the-lens approach. Being someone who ran a Pentax 35mm film system back in the day I was surprised by this, but l think PASM is arguably a better control system in principle. Aperture dials seem a bit of a throwback that appeals to nostalgia but not practicality.

Net, net - I didn't dislike Fuji, and in fact thought their lenses were very good, but it didn't add a lot over m43 in my view and came with some downsides. Of course, Fuji have moved on much more than m43 in sensor tech since then, so perhaps that's not so true these days. But I still don't understand why they persevere with x trans!

The thing with XTrans is that it produces what I consider to be stunning Jpegs
This is attractive to me because I dont enjoy processing and the Fuji output is so good that i can produce very good images using PS and PS for iPad (ignoring the fact that no doubt some of my Fuji’s processed on PS and PS for iPad are a little over processed or could be done better which I’m sure is the case to the eyes of some here which I don’t have issue with)
I just do not get motivated to use RAW / Lightroom and Fuji provides a system where I can achieve pleasing results quickly and easily by alternative means
I’m not sure if thats what motivates the majority of Fuji users but it’s nice to have a company that prioritises OOC and Jpeg output for those that prefer it
With regard to the aperture control on the lens - I find this very intuitive - I grew up at school doing photography with a Zenit EM with similar control but I don’t think it is nostalgia that drives my enjoyment of using this system - it just works very well for me
I note that the left top dial on the XS10 is programmable which I assume will include ISO which will appeal to me as I can then have aperture control from the lens and ISO from the dial and as these were the controls I used for 99% of my shooting even (some would say bizarrely) for my Motorsports - then this camera is halfway or more towards the user experience of an XT3/4
Although the EVF is comparably small I can accept this on a camera at the price and have used similarly sized EVFs on some M43 cameras (I just refuse to accept poor EVFs on high end cameras)

 

[Robstar1963]

Prediction - this is going to be one of the very best selling cameras out there

 

[ibd]

Yes, but I contend there is no demonstrable advantage that it brings. As I posted above, if it is in principle better, why didn't Fuji use it on the GF range? Or that no other manufacturer uses a non Bayer design? It's a marketing gimmick IMHO.

Same reason we're seeing same sensors from every manufacturer. At least 3 years and a couple of bodies for every sensor.

FWIW, I agree with the consensus that x-trans has slightly different characteristics at the Pixel level than bayer. But the overall dynamic range and colors are great in SOOC jpegs -- not just marketing IMHO.

 

[MichailK]

- The 16Mp xtrans sensor delivered great results on skin etc, but it didn't work so well on foliage, esp if you wanted good detail on distant trees etc.

Or that no other manufacturer uses a non Bayer design? It's a marketing gimmick IMHO.

I believe them here: https://petapixel.com/2017/01/27/x-trans-promise-problem/
“What X-Trans really does is trade a bit of chrominance resolution for a bit of luminance resolution"

maybe because this approach gave them a marketing edge back then when moire was a more serious issue for all bayer based others and maybe even more because this extra luminance data result in their famous better skin tones performance output from their jpeg engine at the cost of chrominance resolution causing the distant foliage issues you noticed along the waxy skin issue at higher noise (ISO) situations even more so at distant faces

now, since they have an established “best skin tones” position, it would be a silly marketing move to move away any of the “features” that this position was built upon

I just do not get motivated to use RAW / Lightroom and Fuji provides a system where I can achieve pleasing results quickly and easily by alternative means
I’m not sure if thats what motivates the majority of Fuji users but it’s nice to have a company that prioritises OOC and Jpeg output for those that prefer it

Amen! This is what I am finding with the old X100T I recently acquired and I love it!

Although the EVF is comparably small I can accept this on a camera at the price and have used similarly sized EVFs on some M43 cameras (I just refuse to accept poor EVFs on high end cameras)

I still cannot understand why they did not go for a proper modern evf on the X and M1iii !! They saved money from the parts and made their flag carrying cameras look bad on paper vs all their adversaries

Prediction - this is going to be one of the very best selling cameras out there

if only it had WS for an extra 100$€ !! It seems they tried hard to keep it under the psychological 1000 limit.

if it had WS I would cry a lot before parting with the terrific focus clutch of the 12-40/2.8 for the little worse(?) overall 16-80/4 that would come in my radar screen after shooting for this new Fuji body as fast as I could!

 

[shreebles]

There are apparently advantages and downsides of X-Trans but the differences to a Bayer array seem to be miniscule in higher-end cameras.

https://web.archive.org/web/2018102...trans-iii-vs-bayer-texture-detail-comparison/

I read somewhere that Fujis X-Trans are better than Fujis Bayer sensor cameras, but the rest of the world is using the Bayer array and they can match (or exceed) X-Trans.
If I had the choice, I would choose Bayer and reduce moire in post if it occurs.
As a landscape shooter I care about foliage way too much.

Here is a post from a german language Fuji forum with comparison shots vs. a Panasonic S1.
Rico is quite a knowledgeable guy and he claims that he saw only minute difference in favor (!) of the smaller and cheaper Fujifilm H1 camera:

https://www.fuji-x-forum.de/topic/40557-bayer-vs-x-trans/

 

[amit]

I believe them here: https://petapixel.com/2017/01/27/x-trans-promise-problem/
“What X-Trans really does is trade a bit of chrominance resolution for a bit of luminance resolution"

maybe because this approach gave them a marketing edge back then when moire was a more serious issue for all bayer based others and maybe even more because this extra luminance data result in their famous better skin tones performance output from their jpeg engine at the cost of chrominance resolution causing the distant foliage issues you noticed along the waxy skin issue at higher noise (ISO) situations even more so at distant faces

now, since they have an established “best skin tones” position, it would be a silly marketing move to move away any of the “features” that this position was built upon

Amen! This is what I am finding with the old X100T I recently acquired and I love it!

I still cannot understand why they did not go for a proper modern evf on the X and M1iii !! They saved money from the parts and made their flag carrying cameras look bad on paper vs all their adversaries

if only it had WS for an extra 100$€ !! It seems they tried hard to keep it under the psychological 1000 limit.

if it had WS I would cry a lot before parting with the terrific focus clutch of the 12-40/2.8 for the little worse(?) overall 16-80/4 that would come in my radar screen after shooting for this new Fuji body as fast as I could!

I dont think the 16-80 can compete with the 12-40 ...
Their next move should be making their 16-55 f2.8 smaller...

 

[MichailK]

I dont think the 16-80 can compete with the 12-40 ...

sharpness? rendering? (color? bokeh?)

 

[amit]

sharpness? rendering? (color? bokeh?)

Sharpness.
Ive seen some threads in the fuji forum.

 

[Lupin 3rd]

Their next move should be making their 16-55 f2.8 smaller...

Sure, the same way Olympus made the 12-40/2.8 smaller ....

 

[Robstar1963]

XS10 should be fierce competition for Nikon’s Z50 which doesn’t have IBIS and Fuji has a better range of dedicated lenses ??

 

[MichailK]

XS10 should be fierce competition for Nikon’s Z50 which doesn’t have IBIS and Fuji has a better range of dedicated lenses ??

Nikon made Z-mount APS-C lenses are, how many? Two?
Now with the Z5 around, the Z50 does not make any sense without small accompanying Z-mount lenses. Even while it is cheaper priced. Maybe kitted with a free FTZ adapter for the crop Nikon crowd to lure them into mirorless and even then I am not sure.

 

[iPete]

XS10 should be fierce competition for Nikon’s Z50 which doesn’t have IBIS and Fuji has a better range of dedicated lenses ??

I've actually popped on here to get some views on this camera. The Fujifilm is really ticking my boxes - have been waiting for them to release a smaller body with IBIS. For context, I'm looking for a small-ish body, IBIS, mid-range all round zoom and a fast prime.

Had not considered the Z50 but as you say, it lacks IBIS and there are not many lens options (without an adapter). Played with adapted lenses (on camerasize.com) and it looks cumbersome - makes sense if you already shoot Nikon. On that, Fuiji are offering the X-S10 as three different bundles, including the 16-80 F4.

On writing this post, the Sony A6100 has caught my attention. On paper there is no IBIS but they do offer both a 16-70mm f4 & 35mm 1.8 with OSS at a competitive price to the Fuji 16-80 + 35 1.4. Looks like they would handle very differently, trip to the store needed.

 

[DAEMANO]

Totally not worth buying if you already in the M43 system. Specs look like Fuji benchmarked the G9 and shoehorned into a slightly smaller body. Both Panasonic and Olympus pro bodies have had roughly these specs since G9 firmware 2.0 and have more mature systems. GAS compels means, but the ends will be roughly the same if not worse.