Fuji x20

Hi, i tested once th x10, i found it beautiful and very intuitive, the lens is nice and the manual zoom should be used more often in other camras, the camera looks fine and the VF was ok!...i think this new one should be improved over the x10...i´d love to see such a camera with a 4/3 sensor!
 
I've shot with it a bit and in the process of a review. If I was in the market for that type of camera, I'd give it strong consideration. The only caveat is that, at this time, Lightroom's noise reduction algorithm has some issues with high ISO (1600/3200) Raw shots; they look a bit desaturated. But I'd imagine that Adobe will improve its X-Trans support over time.

The RX100 is about a stop better in terms of noise and gives you more pixels, but it doesn't have the OVF and its lens is slow at the tele end.
 
Keep on coming back to the X20 myself, its seems like as you said, it might just be good enough. The only thing that tempers my own enthusiasm, is seeing the files from my 5 year old APS sensored cameras, and wondering if the smaller sensor will satisfy me in the same way, image-wise. Its this concern that keeps me in a roundabout between the X20, the X100S, the XE1, and the XPro1, and seeing as we're on the good enough theme, I wonder if anyone has gone from a bigger sensor like APS to one like the X20, and been satisfied image-wise.
 
Keith, I meant good enough for my digital camera. I'd still use film whenever I want to. It wouldn't replace my film cameras.
 
I have the x10 as my current digital camera. It really nice. Quick and easy to operate, and, to be honest, the out of camera jpgs with Vevia simulation are really nice, and if needed, the retouch will be minimum. I'd guess the x20 is even better..
 
I love my wife's X10. If I could afford one for myself, I would. Looks and works more like a rangefinder than most digis, and provides great results.

If I could afford an X20...

...well, I'd probably buy an x-pro 1. But if anyone felt like getting me an X20 as a present, I'd be willing to accept.
 
Frank i dont have a x20.. Your comment about good enough is a bit of an open question, a lot depends on what your specific expectations are for your first dive into digital.. examples are
- handling
- High iso expectations
- Manual vs af expectations
With all that being said, below is some of my thoughts... Btw, the new x20 is a good camera..

The x20 is a pretty descents size camera compared to others like the Sony rx100 or something like the Ricoh grd (5)...due to the viewfinder it has. The xtran sensor is a good improvement over the Bayer from my experience moving from x100 to xp1. For me, since I already have a x100 which is only slightly bigger than a x10/20, I decided to pass on the x10/20 type camera... Instead I ended up w/ a rx100 because I wanted a pocketable camera.. I can put an rx100 in my front jean pocket.. The x20 can fit in a baggy front or. Jacket pocket.

One thing to note is the rumor about a csc non-vf type camera w/ a kit lens Fuji is rumored to announce this year. The lowest cost one is rumored to be I n the 599 range w/ the kit lens and is a Bayer design.

That being said, if I were to look today for a small digital camera
- w/ fixed zoom
-- x20 ovf (small xtran p&s sensor)
-- Sony rx100 (LCD only,24mp 1 inch sensor)
- fixed lens
-- Sigma dp 1 or 2 Merrill (28 or 45 fov, 15mp (45 foveon speak) apsc sensor)
-- Ricoh grd5 (28 fov, 16 apsc sensor)
-- Sony Coolpix A (28 fov, 16 apsc sensor)
-- Fuji x100s (35 fov, 16 xtran apsc sensor)
- small csc
-- xe1 w/ kit lens (16mp xtran sensor)
-- Olympus omd (dslr style, 16 mp m43 sensor, worst menu system of the bunch)

Good luck
Gary
 
Thanks for your thoughts so far.

One spec I'm noticing is that the ricoh grd 28 lens is @ f2.8, while the x20 at the wide end is 28 @ f2. That's good.

And the x20 has close focus of 1cm.

That's if I read and remembered the specs correctly, and that certainly isn't certain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom