--
Well-known
I have only had very brief experience with the original X100 (faulty - returned for a refund) but have not been able to get it out of the head. I recently had a good go at an X100s in a shop. It seems wonderful (but the user seems in need of a little adjustment to get around the UI).
I could not take home the pictures and the screen is not the highest resolution. Based on what I have read in some postings, blogs etc. some owners seem to have some reservation about the X100s lens and softness wide open. There seemed to be a hint of softness when zoom in on the LCD, but then again that is hardly the best way to judge. Also my former X100 had softness issues [cameras are animate, right?], but I cannot rule out it was the camera being faulty on that account as well.
Admittedly I am probably rationalizing to not buy, but can X100s owners comment on possible softness wide open (and if so - at which aperture does it go away) and perhaps compare it to the OM-D E-M5 with 25mm Leicasonic wide open?
Please note that I am not trying to start a flaming war against the Fuji. I have seen wonderful work made with the Fujis, and much better than I can possibly achieve, but my pet peeves are fast and accurate AF (which it seems to have now) and sharpness.
All comments much appreciated.
thanks in advance
Xpanded
I could not take home the pictures and the screen is not the highest resolution. Based on what I have read in some postings, blogs etc. some owners seem to have some reservation about the X100s lens and softness wide open. There seemed to be a hint of softness when zoom in on the LCD, but then again that is hardly the best way to judge. Also my former X100 had softness issues [cameras are animate, right?], but I cannot rule out it was the camera being faulty on that account as well.
Admittedly I am probably rationalizing to not buy, but can X100s owners comment on possible softness wide open (and if so - at which aperture does it go away) and perhaps compare it to the OM-D E-M5 with 25mm Leicasonic wide open?
Please note that I am not trying to start a flaming war against the Fuji. I have seen wonderful work made with the Fujis, and much better than I can possibly achieve, but my pet peeves are fast and accurate AF (which it seems to have now) and sharpness.
All comments much appreciated.
thanks in advance
Xpanded
Monochrom
Well-known
Hi, i don´t have such a camera, but when i see pictures on the net at f2 they´re always heavily PP and shrapened to the extreme of rendering bokeh sharp...so i make the smae question is it really sharp?
rbelyell
Well-known
i have had an x100 for a couple of years, and had and sold the omd kit you mentioned. ive never had any softness issues at 2.0, quite the contrary. and i thought the x's IQ was much better than the omd combo.
having said that, there may very well be an issue with the 100s, as it has a different sensor than the 100. based upon my personal observation of the implementation of this new sensor in the x20 vs the old in the x10, both of which ive used, there very well may be some issues with the S that the original x100 did not have.
imo, unless you plan to make great use of the improvements in manual focus made to the S, there is little or no reason to buy the S over the original x100, which is still my 'go to' camera for challenging lighting situations. its IQ in virtually all situations is outstanding, and it is presently selling well below its worth, imo.
tony
having said that, there may very well be an issue with the 100s, as it has a different sensor than the 100. based upon my personal observation of the implementation of this new sensor in the x20 vs the old in the x10, both of which ive used, there very well may be some issues with the S that the original x100 did not have.
imo, unless you plan to make great use of the improvements in manual focus made to the S, there is little or no reason to buy the S over the original x100, which is still my 'go to' camera for challenging lighting situations. its IQ in virtually all situations is outstanding, and it is presently selling well below its worth, imo.
tony
--
Well-known
Thanks Tony - much appreciated. Very valuable input - looking forward to hearing other opinions. I was rather intrigued by the improved AF of the X100s and the extra resolution of the EVF.
--
Well-known
Yes, PP is both a joy and a hindrance
RedLion
Come to the Faire
quick test
quick test
Just took my Fuji X100s and took some informal test shots:
File = JPG
Distance = about 13"
F stop = F2
ISO = 1250
Speed = 1/125
Mode = normal mode (not macro).
Post Processing = minor exposure adjustments only (no changes to contrast, or sharpening, etc...)
Here are some screen captures from Lightroom:
CENTER
UL
UR
LL
LR
quick test
Just took my Fuji X100s and took some informal test shots:
File = JPG
Distance = about 13"
F stop = F2
ISO = 1250
Speed = 1/125
Mode = normal mode (not macro).
Post Processing = minor exposure adjustments only (no changes to contrast, or sharpening, etc...)
Here are some screen captures from Lightroom:
CENTER
UL
UR
LL
LR
--
Well-known
Thanks RedLion - very informative.
Cheers,
Xpanded
Cheers,
Xpanded
So, what was your verdict?
gavinlg
Veteran
My x100 was really sharp at f2. As a 35mm equivalent, it was better wide open than my zeiss ZE distagon 35mm f2, better than my 35L... It's one of the few 35mm lenses that can be used for landscape photos at f2-f2.8 and render consistently all the way to the corners.
f2
f2.8, handheld
f2
f2.8, handheld
--
Well-known
Nothing yet - but a good sample to compare to.
--
Well-known
Thanks Gavin - that sounds very promising. Love the first picture.
taemo
eat sleep shoot
are you shooting in macro mode or regular mode.
I posted this on flickr and fuji-x site because I noticed too that at f2 macro mode, the images are very soft with a dreamy like quality
DSCF0088 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
X100s macro mode by earl.dieta, on Flickr
basically it's the same for everyone, f2 macro mode was very usable on the old X100 but I guess the new sensor doesn't.
here's f2 in normal mode
DSCF0218 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
DSCF0093 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
I posted this on flickr and fuji-x site because I noticed too that at f2 macro mode, the images are very soft with a dreamy like quality
DSCF0088 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
X100s macro mode by earl.dieta, on Flickr
basically it's the same for everyone, f2 macro mode was very usable on the old X100 but I guess the new sensor doesn't.
here's f2 in normal mode
DSCF0218 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
DSCF0093 by earl.dieta, on Flickr
willie_901
Veteran
It IS Soft At Close Distances
It IS Soft At Close Distances
The X100 lens is not designed to be used in for short subject distances at apertures wider than f 4.
This was first dislosed two years ago in an interview with the lens designers on Fuji's original X100 marketing web site.
I am told tmanual now mentions this limitation.
As the subject distance increases, the lens becomes sharper at aperture openings > f 4. Of course it is sharper in all cases as th aperture approaches f 8.
It IS Soft At Close Distances
The X100 lens is not designed to be used in for short subject distances at apertures wider than f 4.
This was first dislosed two years ago in an interview with the lens designers on Fuji's original X100 marketing web site.
I am told tmanual now mentions this limitation.
As the subject distance increases, the lens becomes sharper at aperture openings > f 4. Of course it is sharper in all cases as th aperture approaches f 8.
RedLion
Come to the Faire
The test shots were in normal mode (not macro).
They look pretty good to me, as I don't expect corner perfection when shooting wide open.
Joe
They look pretty good to me, as I don't expect corner perfection when shooting wide open.
Joe
edge100
Well-known
I love my X100, and I don't hesitate to use it at f/2, but it's hardly what I'd call "sharp" at f/2. It's certainly competitive with other f/2 lenses at that f/stop, and it's sharper than my old Canon EF 35 f/1.4L at f/2, but it's not bitingly sharp either.
That said, sharpness really is overrated. There is no photograph that will be ruined by the X100/X100s lack of sharpness at f/2.
That said, sharpness really is overrated. There is no photograph that will be ruined by the X100/X100s lack of sharpness at f/2.
--
Well-known
No, the camera was in normal mode. Beautiful picture the first one.
--
Well-known
I am a bit surprised they did not go for optimal sharpness at maximum aperture.
Thanks.
Thanks.
--
Well-known
Thanks / sounds good.
Horses for courses I guess / in Europe that means Lasagne...
KM-25
Well-known
freax
Established
I bought mine 3 days ago and based on these rumors I did some informal tests with a tripod. I think we must distinguish sharpness using normal mode, and macro mode.
Based on my results I didn't see any real differences (if any) between f2 and f8 in normal mode. But in macro mode, the f2, f2.8 were very soft and I had to have apertures of f5.6 to have good results.
[]'s
Based on my results I didn't see any real differences (if any) between f2 and f8 in normal mode. But in macro mode, the f2, f2.8 were very soft and I had to have apertures of f5.6 to have good results.
[]'s