Takkun
Ian M.
Yep, the original X100, not the S. Same lens, different sensor; haven't really seen much from the S yet. My friend is now using it and I can't wait to see what he gets out of it.
My guess about all these contradictions? It's a very sharp lens across the plane of focus, but falls off very smoothly; its not exceptionally contrasty; and the bokeh is very smooth. Plus, the nice sensor helps. It was always a joy photographing people close up with this camera.
lxmike
M2 fan.
I must admit although not new to photography, the fuji experience has certainly put fresh imputation into my photography and the x100 is certainly a joy and now I know what all the fuss is about
Takkun
Ian M.
I'm not one for pixel-peeping and 100% crops, but I like trying to figure out why lenses look the way they do--I think this exemplifies it.
lxmike
M2 fan.
BlackXList
Well-known
I've not used an X100, but the way the lens is being described, along with the example, reminds me of the Sonnar on my Contax T3.
Its got incredible resolution, all the detail is there, but the rendering is, for lack of a better word "flattering".
Its got incredible resolution, all the detail is there, but the rendering is, for lack of a better word "flattering".
NicoM
Well-known
I think that the character you are talking about might have less to do with the XF18mm lens and more to do with the sensor. Since you're using the X100 and not the X100s, you're using the standard Beyer sensor. To my eyes, the rendition of the color and the sharpness has a much different look the the X-Trans sensor found in the other Series cameras.
I find that the output of the X100s and the X-E1 I perviously had (both with the 35mm and 18mm) are very clinical in the rendering.
I find that the output of the X100s and the X-E1 I perviously had (both with the 35mm and 18mm) are very clinical in the rendering.
So, then... what's yours?
gavinlg
Veteran
x100 lens has a certain coma to it which makes it softer at shorter focussing distances - this is what gives it that lovely 'soft but sharp' and smooth look that it has. I agree it's a stunning lens.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Beginning to wish I hadn't sold it now 
Seriously though they are great little cameras, the only reason I sold up and stuck purely with the XPro is, despite having smallish hands, I prefer a slightly larger camera.
The 18mm, 23mm and eventual addition of the 35mm should see you covered extremely well Mike, it was what kept me going until buying the 23 1.4. Looking forward to seeing some of your shots with it too.
Seriously though they are great little cameras, the only reason I sold up and stuck purely with the XPro is, despite having smallish hands, I prefer a slightly larger camera.
The 18mm, 23mm and eventual addition of the 35mm should see you covered extremely well Mike, it was what kept me going until buying the 23 1.4. Looking forward to seeing some of your shots with it too.
Photog9000
Well-known
How much of the difference is due to the sensor as much as the lens difference? I have read a fair amount from X100 users saying that the 12MP sensor it uses is different from the XPro and X-E series (and my X100S).
Pablito
coco frío
I would not get rid of my X100s because it can operate silently which is a big plus for certain situations. However, the lens tends to exhibit flare / ghosting very badly when there are point source light sources near the edge of the frame or just outside the frame. Have tried various lens hoods and nothing really eliminates the problem. There is another thread about this - others have had the same problem.
gavinlg
Veteran
The ND filter increases flare when turned on FYI.
lxmike
M2 fan.
Beginning to wish I hadn't sold it now
Seriously though they are great little cameras, the only reason I sold up and stuck purely with the XPro is, despite having smallish hands, I prefer a slightly larger camera.
The 18mm, 23mm and eventual addition of the 35mm should see you covered extremely well Mike, it was what kept me going until buying the 23 1.4. Looking forward to seeing some of your shots with it too.
many thanks Simon, rest assured the camera has gone to a good home, eventually I hope to also get a 35 1.4
watch this space
willie_901
Veteran
For a lens designed circa 2010, The 23/2 Fujinon is a unique lens in many ways.
It is deeply recessed ingot he camera body so it appears much smaller than it is. The maximum aperture is wide for the focal length. The rear element is extremely close to the sensor. The lens and sensor were designed together. The CFA micro lenses at the edge of the sensor gather light at different angles than those in the center. The Fuji design team publicly stated the lens should never be used for close ups at apertures wider than f 4. It has a built in ND filter. And, the leaf shutter is built into the lens.
Except in the case of strong point source lights, I found the 23/2 Fujinon to be a great performer. If the APS-C X Series began and ended with the X100, 1 would still be happily using one now.
For the photo shown below I certainly did not engage the ND filter at this light level. I did not use a filter at all. The OEM hood was installed. And I also observed that the ghosting did not depend on aperture. But is was highly dependent on angle. My camera was one of the first batch sold in the U.S.
Has anyone with a later X100 or a X100S seen this sort of behavior?
Fairmount Park Race Track 3327 by william c hutton jr, on Flickr
It is deeply recessed ingot he camera body so it appears much smaller than it is. The maximum aperture is wide for the focal length. The rear element is extremely close to the sensor. The lens and sensor were designed together. The CFA micro lenses at the edge of the sensor gather light at different angles than those in the center. The Fuji design team publicly stated the lens should never be used for close ups at apertures wider than f 4. It has a built in ND filter. And, the leaf shutter is built into the lens.
Except in the case of strong point source lights, I found the 23/2 Fujinon to be a great performer. If the APS-C X Series began and ended with the X100, 1 would still be happily using one now.
For the photo shown below I certainly did not engage the ND filter at this light level. I did not use a filter at all. The OEM hood was installed. And I also observed that the ghosting did not depend on aperture. But is was highly dependent on angle. My camera was one of the first batch sold in the U.S.
Has anyone with a later X100 or a X100S seen this sort of behavior?
Fairmount Park Race Track 3327 by william c hutton jr, on Flickr
gavinlg
Veteran
That one ^ is internal reflections within the camera/lens. Normal for the x100. The x100 may have had this reduced but I'm not totally sure. Completely gone on the Interchangeable X cameras.
lxmike
M2 fan.
Beginning to wish I hadn't sold it now
Seriously though they are great little cameras, the only reason I sold up and stuck purely with the XPro is, despite having smallish hands, I prefer a slightly larger camera.
The 18mm, 23mm and eventual addition of the 35mm should see you covered extremely well Mike, it was what kept me going until buying the 23 1.4. Looking forward to seeing some of your shots with it too.
you could also use selling me your x100 as an excuse to get a X100s
p.s none of us will let your wife know
lxmike
M2 fan.
For a lens designed circa 2010, The 23/2 Fujinon is a unique lens in many ways.
It is deeply recessed ingot he camera body so it appears much smaller than it is. The maximum aperture is wide for the focal length. The rear element is extremely close to the sensor. The lens and sensor were designed together. The CFA micro lenses at the edge of the sensor gather light at different angles than those in the center. The Fuji design team publicly stated the lens should never be used for close ups at apertures wider than f 4. It has a built in ND filter. And, the leaf shutter is built into the lens.
Except in the case of strong point source lights, I found the 23/2 Fujinon to be a great performer. If the APS-C X Series began and ended with the X100, 1 would still be happily using one now.
For the photo shown below I certainly did not engage the ND filter at this light level. I did not use a filter at all. The OEM hood was installed. And I also observed that the ghosting did not depend on aperture. But is was highly dependent on angle. My camera was one of the first batch sold in the U.S.
Has anyone with a later X100 or a X100S seen this sort of behavior?
thankyou this is very very informative
willie_901
Veteran
I agree. The XF lenses are completely free from this artifact.
NicoM
Well-known
Clinical typically means technically correct, so "sharp" falls under clinical.
umcelinho
Marcelo
that kind of ghosting due to coma was pretty much my only complaint about the x100 I had and loved. now I have an x100s and it feels just perfect. Fuji hooked me with the X100, then I got an X-E1 with 14 and 35, love the kit, started missing the ovf, got an used xpro1 with the 23, wow, perfect balance. got mugged, xpro1 gone with a couple M lenses... used the insure $ to get an x100s and an xt1. damn Fuji is getting almost everything right lately. and the 56 is impressive, tried it on the xt1 at a photography fair before I ordered the xt1, draws beautifully.