Rob-F
Likes Leicas
OK I went and got one. I have a little time to decide if I want to keep it. To talk about it, I will have to bring in the Leica/Panasonic D-Lux cameras that have become second nature to me over the past several years.
Impressions on taking the camera out of the box: Nice looking camera! And what a good size it is; not too tiny and not too big. There is a little grip in front and a little rubber piece in back that makes a right-hand only grip easy, in a way that the Pan-Leicas are not (There I go about the Pan-Leicas). I took it out in the evening, sans neckstrap, for some after-sunset photos and found it to be a comfortable hand-held camera with nothing attached. The next day, I tried it on a neckstrap. I used the strap that came with the D-Lux 4, as the Fuji one seemed a bit overlarge for the size of the camera. I think I might rather have a wrist strap in the right strap lug, than to use it on a neckstrap. The camera just feels good in the hand.
Everyone raves about the real metal lens cap. But I found it too bulky in the pocket. I took it off and used a 40.5mm snap-cap, which fits fine.
The optical viewfinder is for emergencies only, when you can't see the screen well enough in bright sunlight. There's no info in this finder; you can't even tell what you have focused on. And although they don't claim that the optical finder is accurate--just 85% according to Fuji--it annoyed me that I was getting too much around the edges that I didn't mean to be in the picture. I quickly started using only the LCD screen, which is much better.
This camera gives you a lot of control, with options I didn't expect to get on such a small camera. If you press the "AF" button, you can use the 4-way control to move the point of focus to where you need it to be, just like on a D-700 or similar. And with the "AE" button you can select Average, multipattern, or spot metering. There is an AE lock/AF/lock button you can press with the thumb, while the index finger stays on the shutter release. Again, just like a DSLR. And like my D700, there is a confusing choice of whether to have this button be for AE lock only, AF lock only, or both. And if you make it be for AE lock only, then you can hold it down while you half-press the shutter button for AF lock. Or was it the other way around? Excuse me while I go read the manual--which, by the way, is not the last word in clarity or thoroughness.
Speaking of the manual, I couldn't get the flash to work. Pressing the flash option on the 4-way did nothing. According to the manual, it should then offer you a choice of several options that Fuji is pleased to call "Super-Intelligent Flash." I finally figured out that I had to press the top edge of the 4-way to select "still image" rather than a bunch of other things it does, like bracketing and movies. I saw nothing in the manual about that. However, the flash works well once you figure that out.
More on controls: there's a programmable function button. The default option is for ISO setting. You can make it be something else, if you want. And there is a WB white balance button. Very handy to have that so accessible.
The optical finder has a diopter wheel whose range of adjustment is so great I can set it to correct my minus 4.5 diopter or so vision, and not need my eyeglasses. However, I can see in the finder just fine with my glasses on.
One thing I'm still investigating is whether the pictures are really as sharp as the ones I get from my D-Lux 3 and D-Lux 4. I don't know that are are--but I don't know they are not, either. My initial impression was that they are not--but the sky was hazy, and details were not standing out in sharp relief. Take this with a grain of salt until I get a chance to shoot the same scenes with both--or maybe all three--cameras. It should be better; the sensor is larger than the PanLeicas; but I'm not sure about the lens yet. I worry they they may have gone too far in trying to make a fast 28-112. Maybe a 28-85 would have been wiser. We'll see. Don't start any rumors about this. I have to gather some facts.
It has 4:3, 3:2, and 16:9 options. But it does it by cropping the basic 4:3 field. I feel that Panasonic got it right with the LX/2 (Leica D-Lux 3), when they started with 16:9 as the full image, at 10MP; then 3:2 at 8.5MP; and 4:3 at 7.5MP. It just makes sense to me for the widest image to have the largest file. Then they screwed it up on the D-Lux 4, which has 9MP in 16:9; 9.5 MP in 3:2; and 10MP at 4:3. But I digress.
Ending on a positive note: the high-ISO performance is awesome for such a small camera. It's light-years ahead of the PanLeicas (and I hardly need add, my M8.2 as well).
Fuji X10, ISO 1600, f/2.8
Impressions on taking the camera out of the box: Nice looking camera! And what a good size it is; not too tiny and not too big. There is a little grip in front and a little rubber piece in back that makes a right-hand only grip easy, in a way that the Pan-Leicas are not (There I go about the Pan-Leicas). I took it out in the evening, sans neckstrap, for some after-sunset photos and found it to be a comfortable hand-held camera with nothing attached. The next day, I tried it on a neckstrap. I used the strap that came with the D-Lux 4, as the Fuji one seemed a bit overlarge for the size of the camera. I think I might rather have a wrist strap in the right strap lug, than to use it on a neckstrap. The camera just feels good in the hand.
Everyone raves about the real metal lens cap. But I found it too bulky in the pocket. I took it off and used a 40.5mm snap-cap, which fits fine.
The optical viewfinder is for emergencies only, when you can't see the screen well enough in bright sunlight. There's no info in this finder; you can't even tell what you have focused on. And although they don't claim that the optical finder is accurate--just 85% according to Fuji--it annoyed me that I was getting too much around the edges that I didn't mean to be in the picture. I quickly started using only the LCD screen, which is much better.
This camera gives you a lot of control, with options I didn't expect to get on such a small camera. If you press the "AF" button, you can use the 4-way control to move the point of focus to where you need it to be, just like on a D-700 or similar. And with the "AE" button you can select Average, multipattern, or spot metering. There is an AE lock/AF/lock button you can press with the thumb, while the index finger stays on the shutter release. Again, just like a DSLR. And like my D700, there is a confusing choice of whether to have this button be for AE lock only, AF lock only, or both. And if you make it be for AE lock only, then you can hold it down while you half-press the shutter button for AF lock. Or was it the other way around? Excuse me while I go read the manual--which, by the way, is not the last word in clarity or thoroughness.
Speaking of the manual, I couldn't get the flash to work. Pressing the flash option on the 4-way did nothing. According to the manual, it should then offer you a choice of several options that Fuji is pleased to call "Super-Intelligent Flash." I finally figured out that I had to press the top edge of the 4-way to select "still image" rather than a bunch of other things it does, like bracketing and movies. I saw nothing in the manual about that. However, the flash works well once you figure that out.
More on controls: there's a programmable function button. The default option is for ISO setting. You can make it be something else, if you want. And there is a WB white balance button. Very handy to have that so accessible.
The optical finder has a diopter wheel whose range of adjustment is so great I can set it to correct my minus 4.5 diopter or so vision, and not need my eyeglasses. However, I can see in the finder just fine with my glasses on.
One thing I'm still investigating is whether the pictures are really as sharp as the ones I get from my D-Lux 3 and D-Lux 4. I don't know that are are--but I don't know they are not, either. My initial impression was that they are not--but the sky was hazy, and details were not standing out in sharp relief. Take this with a grain of salt until I get a chance to shoot the same scenes with both--or maybe all three--cameras. It should be better; the sensor is larger than the PanLeicas; but I'm not sure about the lens yet. I worry they they may have gone too far in trying to make a fast 28-112. Maybe a 28-85 would have been wiser. We'll see. Don't start any rumors about this. I have to gather some facts.
It has 4:3, 3:2, and 16:9 options. But it does it by cropping the basic 4:3 field. I feel that Panasonic got it right with the LX/2 (Leica D-Lux 3), when they started with 16:9 as the full image, at 10MP; then 3:2 at 8.5MP; and 4:3 at 7.5MP. It just makes sense to me for the widest image to have the largest file. Then they screwed it up on the D-Lux 4, which has 9MP in 16:9; 9.5 MP in 3:2; and 10MP at 4:3. But I digress.
Ending on a positive note: the high-ISO performance is awesome for such a small camera. It's light-years ahead of the PanLeicas (and I hardly need add, my M8.2 as well).
Fuji X10, ISO 1600, f/2.8
tbhv55
Well-known
I was very interested to read your very thoughtful post, as I bought an x10 yesterday, almost a full year after buying my x100. I am, therefore, also at the "first impressions" stage. So far, I am finding it to be a very impressive compact... excellent handling, and astonishing image quality from such a small sensor. It appears that it will be a great companion to the x100.
Your findings (both positive and negative) broadly agree with mine, and, for the moment, I'd say that it looks like being a "keeper"!
Thanks for posting...
Your findings (both positive and negative) broadly agree with mine, and, for the moment, I'd say that it looks like being a "keeper"!
Thanks for posting...
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I had intended both of these shots to be at f/4, but the Fuji somehow gave me f/3.6.
Fujifilm X10 at ISO 100, f/3.6
Leica D-lux 3, f/4, ISO 100
These may not be the definitive shots for comparison. I decided to post the shots at relatively wide apertures, as they might tell us more about the lens performance. They are both jpegs. Not sure how much one can really tell at this size. On my 21.5 inch iMac, I feel the D-Lux 3 has the edge. But they are so close. It may be my imagination. One thing is for sure: the Fuji is not sharper than the D-Lux, despite the larger sensor.
Fujifilm X10 at ISO 100, f/3.6
Leica D-lux 3, f/4, ISO 100
These may not be the definitive shots for comparison. I decided to post the shots at relatively wide apertures, as they might tell us more about the lens performance. They are both jpegs. Not sure how much one can really tell at this size. On my 21.5 inch iMac, I feel the D-Lux 3 has the edge. But they are so close. It may be my imagination. One thing is for sure: the Fuji is not sharper than the D-Lux, despite the larger sensor.
tbhv55
Well-known
Interesting... although I must say that I find that the x10 renders a shot rather nicely. Sharpness IMHO is only necessary up to a point, after which it does little to enhance an image. In fact, in recent years, I have found that I frequently choose to soften a sharp image slightly. I find that, if the overall rendering of the image is good (to my taste, of course), sharpness becomes virtually irrelevant, and sometimes even undesirable.
Your sample shots show that both cameras are very capable - especially when sensor size is taken into account - and I'm glad that I don't have to choose between them, since I don't have a D-Lux 3! At first glance (and at internet resolution) the x10 shot seems a little sharper - but it also has higher contrast, so perhaps this is an illusion.
My experience with both the x10 and the x100, is that they do a superb job of rendering colours, which I find more important than sharpness. I'd guess that this may be a result of Fuji's background in film manufacturing.
Good luck with choosing between these two cameras... alternatively, why not keep both?!
Your sample shots show that both cameras are very capable - especially when sensor size is taken into account - and I'm glad that I don't have to choose between them, since I don't have a D-Lux 3! At first glance (and at internet resolution) the x10 shot seems a little sharper - but it also has higher contrast, so perhaps this is an illusion.
My experience with both the x10 and the x100, is that they do a superb job of rendering colours, which I find more important than sharpness. I'd guess that this may be a result of Fuji's background in film manufacturing.
Good luck with choosing between these two cameras... alternatively, why not keep both?!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I mostly agree. I think the Fuji has richer color. In fact, I rechecked the settings on the D-Lux to make sure that something wasn't set wrong. It was set to high saturation, high sharpness, standard contrast. The Fuji was set to "Velvia." If the light is the same tomorrow, I will try it with the D-Lux 4.
I think you are right. I think it's a keeper.
I think you are right. I think it's a keeper.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Here is one from the D-Lux 4, shot this morning under the same light conditions and from the same camera position. Whereas the D_Lux 3 only has a moderate step-up option for image enhancement, the D-Lux 4 has two levels of it. I shot this picture at the highest level of color saturation and sharpness, and one bump up in contrast. I think it is a better match for the Velvia setting of the Fuji X10. This is at ISO 100, f/4, and 24mm (the other shots are at 28mm).
Leica D-Lux 4, 24mm, f/4 with in-camera enhancement.
Leica D-Lux 4, 24mm, f/4 with in-camera enhancement.
tbhv55
Well-known
Your later shot certainly brings them much closer together. It would appear that you can't really go wrong with either, from a quality perspective... so perhaps it will come down to a preference with regard to ergonomics, or other factors. For me, the x10 is very easy to use, but I have never used a D-Lux, therefore I can't make the comparison. Perhaps I should avoid seeing/handling the D-Lux, to make certain that I'm not tempted to spend yet more money!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
In using the X10, the things I miss are the joystick control, the switch for selecting aspect ratios without having to go into the menu, and the switch for selecting normal or closeup range on the D-Lux cameras. The X10 on the other hand has its hard-wired button for white balance, and the user-defined button that comes factory set for ISO. Those are very handy as well.
I feel that based on the pictures I posted, the X10 has a better, more natural color rendition, even on the Velvia setting. The strongest setting on the D-Lux 4 is a bit larger than life. while some may feel that Velvia itself is larger than life, I think the Velvia setting on the X10 comes the closest to what I actually saw when I took the pictures.
Yes, I think it's a keeper.
I feel that based on the pictures I posted, the X10 has a better, more natural color rendition, even on the Velvia setting. The strongest setting on the D-Lux 4 is a bit larger than life. while some may feel that Velvia itself is larger than life, I think the Velvia setting on the X10 comes the closest to what I actually saw when I took the pictures.
Yes, I think it's a keeper.
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
hi, your later shot #3 brings it closer to #1 but the shot #1 looks more natural. Somehow the sky in #3 looks a tad too saturated 
but i confess, i have only shot velva 50 once..
thanks
but i confess, i have only shot velva 50 once..
thanks
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I think you are right. The third photo makes the sky a color that it isn't. Too much green, I'd say. Not sure why. The camera was set for a +1 contrast. Another frame I shot at +/- 0 is a tad more natural. Also, I had the Fuji set for Adobe RGB, but the Leica photo EXIFs shows they were sRGB. I'm going to see if there's a way to switch them to Adobe RGB, but I haven't found it yet.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Here is a shot taken with the D-Lux 4 at the same time as #3, but the contrast was set to +/-0. Saturation was still at +2.
All this effort was to make the D-Lux pictures look as good as the X10 looked on the first try! I believe this one may come the closest. For some reason, with the in-camera contrast set to +1, the sky went too cyan. Now I think it's closer to reality.
All this effort was to make the D-Lux pictures look as good as the X10 looked on the first try! I believe this one may come the closest. For some reason, with the in-camera contrast set to +1, the sky went too cyan. Now I think it's closer to reality.