lencap
Established
I was hoping that the Fuji X20 would be a Leica M9 substitute for $600. I guess we know that isn't quite what happened. I've only had it a few days, but although it's not a Leica, it is a fine compact camera, but not perfect. I strongly considered the X100s before buying the X20, but for my type of shooting a single 35mm perspective is too restrictive. I mostly shoot a 50mm perspective. That, and the desire to find an inexpensive way to expand from the 50mm length of my M9, led me to explore the X20.
I can't comment on the new sensor, I don't have the tools or skill to make fine measurements and comparisons, but the camera produces very nice shots right out of the camera. As small as the pop-up flash is I wasn't expecting much, but it works very well. It seems to have a variable power output, working with the camera's electronics to give whatever light is needed relative to its total output. A nice feature.
One thing I'm not very happy about is the framing of the scene. Sean Reid noted in his X10 review that the viewfinder only shows 85% of the image that you will create when you take a shot. I was hoping that would improve with the X20, but it seems just as bad. Imagine framing a shot to be just the way you want it, and when you look at the image the framing is totally different from what you intended. Worse, at least to me, is that the framing is wrong in all directions. There is added image on top/bottom left/right of the shot you composed. It's very frustrating and, to me, a major turnoff.
The view through the finder is very good. It automatically switches off the rear LED screen when your eye is over the finder - a nice touch. The finder is also a big improvement over the X10 - you can see where the sensor is focused and all the detail of the settings. The finder also changes colors depending on the available light - another nice feature.
Picture quality if very good - regardless of sensor size. Colors are rich, but not excessive, and the range seems very wide. I've not played much with Lightroom yet, but the newest version of Lightroom has a special RAW process for decoding the newest Fuji sensors. Based on the out of camera shots I'm getting that should provide the potential for some amazing photos.
Build quality is fine - feels good in hand, not overly small despite my concerns. The ability to select different focal lengths is a very big plus. Settings for 28,35, 50, 85 and 112 are standard. A nice array.
Focus is very fast and accurate - Fuji's advertising is accurate on this. A big improvement. What is also a welcome surprise is the macro mode. You can focus within an inch or so of the lens - very nice. Good depth of field, or blur, you can select what you want. I haven't played with the video capabilities yet.
Overall, as an initial pass, a very good compact camera with superb features and color rendition. Easy to handle, well built and multiple focal lengths for $600. Can't think of anything that compares. If the finder gave 100% coverage there would be no need to buy anything else, but with the limitations of the finder just be aware that you may wind up using the LED display to frame your shots instead of the finder. That makes it a good camera, with a lot of competition, not a "rangefinder" camera at a bargain price.
Still, a worthwhile addition to your kit, especially if you travel or want something better than an iPhone. I guess if I were a professional reviewer I'd rate it "Recommended". Just be aware of the finder. That's my major (and really only) caveat, but since this is the RANGEFINDER forum, it's a pretty major caveat.
I can't comment on the new sensor, I don't have the tools or skill to make fine measurements and comparisons, but the camera produces very nice shots right out of the camera. As small as the pop-up flash is I wasn't expecting much, but it works very well. It seems to have a variable power output, working with the camera's electronics to give whatever light is needed relative to its total output. A nice feature.
One thing I'm not very happy about is the framing of the scene. Sean Reid noted in his X10 review that the viewfinder only shows 85% of the image that you will create when you take a shot. I was hoping that would improve with the X20, but it seems just as bad. Imagine framing a shot to be just the way you want it, and when you look at the image the framing is totally different from what you intended. Worse, at least to me, is that the framing is wrong in all directions. There is added image on top/bottom left/right of the shot you composed. It's very frustrating and, to me, a major turnoff.
The view through the finder is very good. It automatically switches off the rear LED screen when your eye is over the finder - a nice touch. The finder is also a big improvement over the X10 - you can see where the sensor is focused and all the detail of the settings. The finder also changes colors depending on the available light - another nice feature.
Picture quality if very good - regardless of sensor size. Colors are rich, but not excessive, and the range seems very wide. I've not played much with Lightroom yet, but the newest version of Lightroom has a special RAW process for decoding the newest Fuji sensors. Based on the out of camera shots I'm getting that should provide the potential for some amazing photos.
Build quality is fine - feels good in hand, not overly small despite my concerns. The ability to select different focal lengths is a very big plus. Settings for 28,35, 50, 85 and 112 are standard. A nice array.
Focus is very fast and accurate - Fuji's advertising is accurate on this. A big improvement. What is also a welcome surprise is the macro mode. You can focus within an inch or so of the lens - very nice. Good depth of field, or blur, you can select what you want. I haven't played with the video capabilities yet.
Overall, as an initial pass, a very good compact camera with superb features and color rendition. Easy to handle, well built and multiple focal lengths for $600. Can't think of anything that compares. If the finder gave 100% coverage there would be no need to buy anything else, but with the limitations of the finder just be aware that you may wind up using the LED display to frame your shots instead of the finder. That makes it a good camera, with a lot of competition, not a "rangefinder" camera at a bargain price.
Still, a worthwhile addition to your kit, especially if you travel or want something better than an iPhone. I guess if I were a professional reviewer I'd rate it "Recommended". Just be aware of the finder. That's my major (and really only) caveat, but since this is the RANGEFINDER forum, it's a pretty major caveat.
FA Limited
missing in action
thanks for the write up. it's too bad you didn't know about the viewfinder earlier, it is listed in the specs. that said the overlay should also make it more useful than in the X10.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x20/specifications/
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x20/specifications/
Jimbo70
Newbie
I have the X20 and really don't understand the complaint about the OVF to be a problem. Some of the first DSLRs I used were not much better. If you can see the object in the OVF it will be in the photo along with some unwanted areas around it. A simple use of the crop tool and it's fixed.
GoodPhotos
Carpe lumen!
So I went down to the PHSNE show this last weekend and sold my IIIf, 50/1.5, 50/3.5, 90/4 and Rolleiflex MX-EVS because I realised that I had had the same roll of film in each of them for more than a year.
I took my proceeds and purchased an X20. (Shipped Next Day because I'm impatient.)
I unboxed it and put a red Softie from Tom A on it, a Promaster 2.7" LCD protector, a pinch style 40.5 cap and am waiting to get a Lensmate Thumbrest when they are ready. I have the hood on order.
Still undetermined if I'm going to use a neck strap or a wrist strap, but time will tell.
I am VERY impressed with the IQ of the thing so far, but I'm only a few hundred photos into it.
As you can see, mine is the really rare and hard to come by Leitz Edition
I took my proceeds and purchased an X20. (Shipped Next Day because I'm impatient.)
I unboxed it and put a red Softie from Tom A on it, a Promaster 2.7" LCD protector, a pinch style 40.5 cap and am waiting to get a Lensmate Thumbrest when they are ready. I have the hood on order.
Still undetermined if I'm going to use a neck strap or a wrist strap, but time will tell.
I am VERY impressed with the IQ of the thing so far, but I'm only a few hundred photos into it.
As you can see, mine is the really rare and hard to come by Leitz Edition
rbelyell
Well-known
i sold the x10, which i liked very much, for the x20 because it solved the only problem i had with the x10: no exposure or focus confirm in the vf. that it did. however my assumption that the IQ would be the same or better did not turn out to be true. never assume because you make an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me'...
look, this is really a fun camera to use. ive had lots of digis, from 5d to ep2 to omd to my present lineup of gxr m mount and x100, and lots i didnt mention. and the x20 is literally the most fun ive had using a camera. the ovf set to a manual zoom lens thats both reasonably wide and reasonably close, just awesome. you cant really get that experience. and its a nice looking and really nice feeling cam. small but solid, very nice for what it is. fast fast autofocus too.
but honestly, the jpeg IQ is very disappointing. shots of close up subjects come out pretty good and i think properly show off the lack of AA filter. but as the subject recedes, so does the IQ. it gets mushy. theres no clarity throughout the frame. and i dont wanna hear that i'm a 'pixel peeper', whatever the heck that is. i have an aesthetic that typically prefers seeing in photos what my eye sees in real life, and all our eyes see clearly throughout the frame. it seems hypocritical to hear 'pixel peeping' complaints from folks with thousands of dollars of the best cams and highest resolution lenses sitting in their closets. if you dont care about clarity, thats fine, but consider instead of shooting some top-of-the-mount M+cron/lux combo, you might want to be shooting a plastic cam with a miniscus lens and posting to the LOMO forum. ):
enough rant, sorry. back to the x20. yeah, mushy landscapes and subjects over 50' away. and while many say that RAW is the way to go, i personally dont buy a p&s to shoot RAW and spend my time post processing to get to a quality image that $600 worth of camera should be programmed to provide. thats what i paid for; this isnt a pro tool, its a pocket cam!
having said this, i did in fact try shooting RAW, and i found the images are both softer and noisier than the accompanying jpegs, and my meager PP skills could not elevate them. perhaps yours can.
now, because i tried so hard and over so many weeks to convince myself i was wrong, and the images are in fact pleasing to me, i can no longer return the cam and am relegated to hoping fuji hears the hue and cry from many on the web and provide some firmware fix. fingers crossed...
tony
look, this is really a fun camera to use. ive had lots of digis, from 5d to ep2 to omd to my present lineup of gxr m mount and x100, and lots i didnt mention. and the x20 is literally the most fun ive had using a camera. the ovf set to a manual zoom lens thats both reasonably wide and reasonably close, just awesome. you cant really get that experience. and its a nice looking and really nice feeling cam. small but solid, very nice for what it is. fast fast autofocus too.
but honestly, the jpeg IQ is very disappointing. shots of close up subjects come out pretty good and i think properly show off the lack of AA filter. but as the subject recedes, so does the IQ. it gets mushy. theres no clarity throughout the frame. and i dont wanna hear that i'm a 'pixel peeper', whatever the heck that is. i have an aesthetic that typically prefers seeing in photos what my eye sees in real life, and all our eyes see clearly throughout the frame. it seems hypocritical to hear 'pixel peeping' complaints from folks with thousands of dollars of the best cams and highest resolution lenses sitting in their closets. if you dont care about clarity, thats fine, but consider instead of shooting some top-of-the-mount M+cron/lux combo, you might want to be shooting a plastic cam with a miniscus lens and posting to the LOMO forum. ):
enough rant, sorry. back to the x20. yeah, mushy landscapes and subjects over 50' away. and while many say that RAW is the way to go, i personally dont buy a p&s to shoot RAW and spend my time post processing to get to a quality image that $600 worth of camera should be programmed to provide. thats what i paid for; this isnt a pro tool, its a pocket cam!
having said this, i did in fact try shooting RAW, and i found the images are both softer and noisier than the accompanying jpegs, and my meager PP skills could not elevate them. perhaps yours can.
now, because i tried so hard and over so many weeks to convince myself i was wrong, and the images are in fact pleasing to me, i can no longer return the cam and am relegated to hoping fuji hears the hue and cry from many on the web and provide some firmware fix. fingers crossed...
tony
Jimbo70
Newbie
I too find the X20 to be a fun camera to use. Try these settings it should help.
Color +1
Sharpness +1
Highlight Tone -1
Shadow Tone 0
Noise Reduction -2
Hopefully Fuji will address the Jpeg problem with a firmware update.
Color +1
Sharpness +1
Highlight Tone -1
Shadow Tone 0
Noise Reduction -2
Hopefully Fuji will address the Jpeg problem with a firmware update.
rbelyell
Well-known
thanks jim. my settings are:
film sim: bracket provia/mono/velvia or continuous provia
color -1
sharpness +2
highlight tone -2
shadow tone +1 (where possible)
noise reduction -2
hdr 100%
iso auto 250ss/100-1600iso
because higher hdr settings result in cam choosing higher (thus softer and noisier) iso's, i keep it at 100% which tends to keep auto iso at 100 where its best. i try to make up for that and increase DR by decreasing highlight tone which increasingly prevents highlights from blowing, and similarly increasing shadow tone settings to brighten shadows, so they kind of act in tandem to increase DR. in tough situations i meter for highlights and pull shadow detail out in PP. i find this generally the best approach, but absolutely necessary with this particular camera, because, like film, with the x20 once a highlight is blown its gone for good.
i read the other day on some review site that places much emphasis on shooting charts (arghh!!), that 4.0 is the optimal aperture, though i find that hard to believe as thats like f16 given the crop factor. i havent had time to test this theory yet as i typically shoot this cam, and the x10 before it, under 3.2, using that ap only for extreme dof.
tony
film sim: bracket provia/mono/velvia or continuous provia
color -1
sharpness +2
highlight tone -2
shadow tone +1 (where possible)
noise reduction -2
hdr 100%
iso auto 250ss/100-1600iso
because higher hdr settings result in cam choosing higher (thus softer and noisier) iso's, i keep it at 100% which tends to keep auto iso at 100 where its best. i try to make up for that and increase DR by decreasing highlight tone which increasingly prevents highlights from blowing, and similarly increasing shadow tone settings to brighten shadows, so they kind of act in tandem to increase DR. in tough situations i meter for highlights and pull shadow detail out in PP. i find this generally the best approach, but absolutely necessary with this particular camera, because, like film, with the x20 once a highlight is blown its gone for good.
i read the other day on some review site that places much emphasis on shooting charts (arghh!!), that 4.0 is the optimal aperture, though i find that hard to believe as thats like f16 given the crop factor. i havent had time to test this theory yet as i typically shoot this cam, and the x10 before it, under 3.2, using that ap only for extreme dof.
tony
viramati
Established
As a street camera this a a little gem with lightning fast auto focus and totally silent. The RAW files are very good considering the sensor size with a good DR and clean at high iso with a film like feel and very low chroma noise for the size of sensor. Don't like the out of camera jpegs at all but then I always shoot RAW so that is not a problem. the viewfinder is great once you get used to the 85% FOV and I like the focus confirmation and info that you get. In all a well thought out camera and very enjoyable to use
To consider this camera as a simple P&S is IMHO missing the point. Yes better out of camera jpegs would be good but anyone using this camera in a serious way will shoot RAW in any case and a few well thought out presets in Lr4 can give me wonderful images at the click of a button. For me Photography is just as much about the PP as about taking the image it is half the enjoyment of the whole process.
Anyway I have only had it for a couple of weeks and here are a few shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viramati/sets/72157633287333435/
To consider this camera as a simple P&S is IMHO missing the point. Yes better out of camera jpegs would be good but anyone using this camera in a serious way will shoot RAW in any case and a few well thought out presets in Lr4 can give me wonderful images at the click of a button. For me Photography is just as much about the PP as about taking the image it is half the enjoyment of the whole process.
Anyway I have only had it for a couple of weeks and here are a few shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viramati/sets/72157633287333435/
rbelyell
Well-known
i absolutely believe we are all entitled to our own opinions, but may i ask david, what type of 'serious work' is being done with this camera? i love fuji, and i can see 'serious work' being done by many professionals with the xp1, xe1, and even the x100(s). but this is a tiny sensor, pocketable p&s, albeit with a good deal of manual controls, that cannot be shot in low light over 800 even in RAW.
look, i often take myself 'seriously' (usually to my owm embarassment) and am often proud of my 'work' (probably more than is justified), but i seldom say i'm doing 'serious work' and if i did i could not honestly say such a thing in reference to this kind of camera, or its competitors, like the canon s100. so i do ask, what kind of serious work are we talking about?
and while i totally support the notion many photographers have that PP is equally important to image taking, i also fully support the notion many including myself have that its not equally important. both are valid positions to take. but again, i think the whole RAW argument loses logical appeal with a tiny sensored cam with a 4+x crop factor. and look, maybe thats still more subjective a point than i think, but this isnt: this kind of camera should not force you to shoot RAW to get decent results. while we may differ in our opinion, i'm willing to take a bet that way way more than 50% of the people who buy this have absolutely no intention of spending the computer space and PP time necessary to shoot RAW and they shouldnt be forced to do so. its just not aimed at that audience, and its capability doesnt logically warrant those investments generally, though they might for you. anywho, thats how i sees it anyways...no offense intended and i hope none taken.
tony
look, i often take myself 'seriously' (usually to my owm embarassment) and am often proud of my 'work' (probably more than is justified), but i seldom say i'm doing 'serious work' and if i did i could not honestly say such a thing in reference to this kind of camera, or its competitors, like the canon s100. so i do ask, what kind of serious work are we talking about?
and while i totally support the notion many photographers have that PP is equally important to image taking, i also fully support the notion many including myself have that its not equally important. both are valid positions to take. but again, i think the whole RAW argument loses logical appeal with a tiny sensored cam with a 4+x crop factor. and look, maybe thats still more subjective a point than i think, but this isnt: this kind of camera should not force you to shoot RAW to get decent results. while we may differ in our opinion, i'm willing to take a bet that way way more than 50% of the people who buy this have absolutely no intention of spending the computer space and PP time necessary to shoot RAW and they shouldnt be forced to do so. its just not aimed at that audience, and its capability doesnt logically warrant those investments generally, though they might for you. anywho, thats how i sees it anyways...no offense intended and i hope none taken.
tony
viramati
Established
Serious WAY
Serious WAY
Hi Tony. I didn't say 'serious work' I said 'in a serious WAY' which is very different. What I mean by this is that this is a camera which has very capable manual controls and a good RAW (considering sensor size) output and for those who want to go beyond the P&S shoot the X20 is very good. Yes it has a lot of auto, scene settings etc for the beginner which I agree are let down by the in camera jpegs especially at high iso. I have in fact been on to fuji UK about this and have sent them some files as I fail to see why you can get such good results out of Lr4.4 even at iso 3200 when the jpeg equivalent are truly appalling and yes if I was a jpeg only shooter I wouldn't buy this camera. Hopefully fuji will sort this in a firmware update.
Anyway if you have Lr4.4 or have access to it try these setting at high iso from 800 even up to 3200. I have them set as a preset and use them as a starting point. You will find you get very usable files even at 3200 with a grain like feel and almost no chroma noise even in the shadows (come on fuji)
(basic)
clarity +15
(tone curve)
linear or medium contrast according to taste
(detail)
sharpening section
amount 30
radius 1.0
masking 0
NR section
luminance 43
detail 50 (default)
contrast 12
colour 40
detail 50 (default)
I think you will be surprised I was!!
for base iso use these settings
(basic)
vibrance +13
(tone curve)
linear or medium contrast according to taste
(detail)
sharpening section
amount 36
radius 1.3
detail 50
masking 21
NR section
luminance 7
Detail 50 (default)
for a Velvia type feel use the above with saturation in the basic setting set to +15
Serious WAY
Hi Tony. I didn't say 'serious work' I said 'in a serious WAY' which is very different. What I mean by this is that this is a camera which has very capable manual controls and a good RAW (considering sensor size) output and for those who want to go beyond the P&S shoot the X20 is very good. Yes it has a lot of auto, scene settings etc for the beginner which I agree are let down by the in camera jpegs especially at high iso. I have in fact been on to fuji UK about this and have sent them some files as I fail to see why you can get such good results out of Lr4.4 even at iso 3200 when the jpeg equivalent are truly appalling and yes if I was a jpeg only shooter I wouldn't buy this camera. Hopefully fuji will sort this in a firmware update.
Anyway if you have Lr4.4 or have access to it try these setting at high iso from 800 even up to 3200. I have them set as a preset and use them as a starting point. You will find you get very usable files even at 3200 with a grain like feel and almost no chroma noise even in the shadows (come on fuji)
(basic)
clarity +15
(tone curve)
linear or medium contrast according to taste
(detail)
sharpening section
amount 30
radius 1.0
masking 0
NR section
luminance 43
detail 50 (default)
contrast 12
colour 40
detail 50 (default)
I think you will be surprised I was!!
for base iso use these settings
(basic)
vibrance +13
(tone curve)
linear or medium contrast according to taste
(detail)
sharpening section
amount 36
radius 1.3
detail 50
masking 21
NR section
luminance 7
Detail 50 (default)
for a Velvia type feel use the above with saturation in the basic setting set to +15
rbelyell
Well-known
thanks david, thats incredibly nice for you to share these, as im sure they took you much trial and error. i do use LR4 and will try them. i'm also glad folks are complaining directly to fuji about their jpeg engine. its so hard to understand when their xp1 and x100 jpeg engines are truly fabulous. they spoiled us, so its hard for us to go back to eating gruel! ):
again, thank you for sharing, and you should post some of your results here, i'd love to see what youre doing with the 20.
tony
again, thank you for sharing, and you should post some of your results here, i'd love to see what youre doing with the 20.
tony
viramati
Established
I am only really staring to get to grips with the camera and you can see some X20 shots on my flickr photostream. I agree with you about the X100 (which I have now sold) and hope that fuji do come up with an update but even so I would probably always shoot RAW anyway as that is what I am used to. I am mainly a leica M9 shooter and the high iso settings are an adaptation of the settings that I use for that at iso 2500 and the M9 is notoriously not very good at that level and I manage to get workable images with these settings
gerafotografija
Member
Although ACR/CS6 is OK for .RAF files, Aperture is now a nice alternative after the recent update.
Based on what I have seen so far, the quality I am getting by importing raw from the X20 is at least as good, and I really prefer it for organizing my image libraries and simple adjustments ahead of editing in PS.
Here's an example.
Although my OMD, especially with the Leica designed Pany 25/1.4 still wins for subtle transparent color painting, the X series is winning me over with awesome camera designs, and an intense color rendition that seems to work equally well.
Based on what I have seen so far, the quality I am getting by importing raw from the X20 is at least as good, and I really prefer it for organizing my image libraries and simple adjustments ahead of editing in PS.
Here's an example.
Although my OMD, especially with the Leica designed Pany 25/1.4 still wins for subtle transparent color painting, the X series is winning me over with awesome camera designs, and an intense color rendition that seems to work equally well.
btgc
Veteran
Arejukas, users of non-wide screens could read this thread if you would post smaller image or post just a link to large image.
I'm considering some of X-fixed zoom models and came to read on X20. I'm ready for not-too-accurate OVF as it's not TTL and this is OK.
I just hope there's way to make AF using only central point. There's no way I'm going to hand choice of focus to camera.
Can anyone comment on Fuji RAW converter, how usable it is? Other free alternatives?
Please, no recommendations to use LR or other paid SW, as I don't own any and not going to purchase separately engine for a new car which comes at it's own price.
GoodPhotos - brave (though realistic and understandable) decision! I just wouldn't use softie with any digital camera...first, they anyway have soft and smooth releases (which is subjective), but mostly because they don't have rigidness of mechanical linkages under hood. I think I have read issues with softie+X100, or maybe I'm just wrong. Just sayin'
Right now I can't think of any digital camera ever, having constant flash output. Even all late-80's film compacts had variable power flash. Probably I just misunderstood you.
I'm considering some of X-fixed zoom models and came to read on X20. I'm ready for not-too-accurate OVF as it's not TTL and this is OK.
I just hope there's way to make AF using only central point. There's no way I'm going to hand choice of focus to camera.
Can anyone comment on Fuji RAW converter, how usable it is? Other free alternatives?
Please, no recommendations to use LR or other paid SW, as I don't own any and not going to purchase separately engine for a new car which comes at it's own price.
GoodPhotos - brave (though realistic and understandable) decision! I just wouldn't use softie with any digital camera...first, they anyway have soft and smooth releases (which is subjective), but mostly because they don't have rigidness of mechanical linkages under hood. I think I have read issues with softie+X100, or maybe I'm just wrong. Just sayin'
Right now I can't think of any digital camera ever, having constant flash output. Even all late-80's film compacts had variable power flash. Probably I just misunderstood you.