Fuji Fujifilm X-S1 - is it worth buying

hannahntilly

Veteran
Location
Surrey, UK
Name
Peter
I've noticed that the X-S1 is being heavily discounted in the UK currently to about £250. That's about 1/3 of the introduction price.

I have a couple of the older m4/3 bodies including a G1 and my longest focal length is the 14-45mm zoom. Not sure if I'd be better off getting a long zoom for my m4/3 body - maybe a 45-200 or 100-300. However, these are retailing at £250 and £420 currently and only the latter would give equivalent range.

I'm a photographer of limited means so value is important to me and I like a bargain (together with the best image quality for my £££s). The other downside might be the size of the Fuji. I'm keen on smaller cameras. Would anyone with experience of the XS-1 care to comment? I'm more than happy with X10 image samples I've seen in reviews and on forums so would be happy if the X-S1 is indeed similar Thanks,
 
I think it comes down to which trade-offs are acceptable to you.

The IQ from a Lumix 100-300 or Oly 75-300 is definitely a step above what the Fuji can give you.

But not needing to change lenses is also a plus. When I originally had the X-S1, I was dissatsified with the IQ in relation to the m43 cameras and couldn't justify keeping it. I no longer have a m43 set-up and recently picked up a Fuji HS50EXR (a different superzoom) because I decided I could live with the hit to IQ, but wanted some tele reach on a budget.

If you've seen the samples from the X10 and X-S1 and are happy with them, it's a great all-rounder.....especially at the recent price levels. But if you're tempted to pixel peep and don't mind changing lenses (which may not be an issue if you shoot with 2 bodies), I think the results with the m43 cameras are appreciable better.
 
Luke is right about image quality being better from a micro four-thirds set up. But you sound like you're already okay with the IQ from the Fuji X10 and the results from the X-S1 are indeed similar. Just remember that the X-S1 isn't a smallish camera. It's pretty much the size of a small DSLR. But not having to switch lenses can be very important in the right kind of situation. And the X-S1's manual zoom beats the toggle-switch affair on many other bridge cameras. I'm kind of interested in Fuji's latest bridge camera effort, the S1. But that's more money than a leftover X-S1.

EDIT: Luke, how is the HS50EXR working out? What can you tell me about IQ? Better than the X-S1? Time and sensor technology march on...
 
Steve,
I'll let you know when I know more. I've been working 6 days a week since I got it (one of the problems of owning a small business with one employee is that when that one employee needs time off.....it's all me). My initial impressions are that IQ wise, it is fairly similar to the X-S1....maybe a half step down, but with the trade-off of much more reach (which is really the reason I got it).
 
Thanks for your speedy comments. I think I need to ponder and convince myself that I really need the reach of a superzoom and that I'd actually use such a big camera. Recently I've been using the X100, together with the LX5 if I need wider or more reach, and I'm really pleased with the results of both. When I look through my pictures for the last 10 years, only about 2% of them are at a telephoto focal length. I think it's just that I saw a bargain and probably a bit of GAS.
 
Well, if you don't have a long lens, you can't shot long ;)

The 45-200 can be found pretty cheap I believe (but then I don't think that is very long.....but for someone who's range ends at 45mm, it might seem longer than it does to me)
 
when I played around with an XS1 in store, I was surprised how big it was. Not even in "small" DSLR territory, but rather mid-sized (I'm aware that that is a fairly subjective judgement :) )
On the plus side, I remember it having a really nice big viewfinder.

Not sure if the XS-1 is going to match the X10 in image quality. I read in some reviews that the lens is a bit softer. This is of course just me repeating what I read, so take it with a grain of salt :)

Another m43 option would be the Oly 40-150mm. It has far less reach, but is a pretty good lens for the money.
 
when I played around with an XS1 in store, I was surprised how big it was. Not even in "small" DSLR territory, but rather mid-sized (I'm aware that that is a fairly subjective judgement :) )

I'd agree with this. The body of the X-S1 felt to be very similar in size to my old Canon EOS 50D which definitely wasn't a small DSLR. The 50D was very comfortable to hold however so there is something to be said for a larger body.
 
for me 2 cents, if one is consider a bridge camera and they want reach, they need to be willing to carry a bigger "camera/lens" set-up. The real weight savings vs a DSLR is not carrying ANY extra lenses and having everything from wide to SUPER long in one package.

It's definitely down to personal choice, but I actually find a DSLR shape and size fairly comfortable. The problem with DSLRs is to cover all those focal lengths would take a couple lenses....and the one with reach (if it's going to be decent will be pretty big and heavy on its' own) will make a pretty heavy package.

When I recently got the Fuji HS50EXR, it felt "big" in my hands. But once I got used to it, it felt great..... and actually, I think it's lighter (though larger and bulkier) than my Sony RX1.
 
you're absolutely right about the size/weight savings of not having additional lenses to carry, Luke!

I just mentioned the size of the XS-1 as "surprisingly big" since it's bigger than any other super-zoom I had seen so far and the original poster, Peter, mentioned that he was keen on smaller cameras... :)

We all know, small size isn't everything ;) I just thought I'd mention this fact about the XS-1 since it may not be apparent from looking at product photos...
 
My main cameras are Fuji, but not the X- S1. However I do have a Lumix G3 on which I keep a 45-200 mounted. This is a great lens, it is very suitable for hand holding and the IQ is good enough that you can crop the images in PP to attain "closer" images.

I do have an X10 and I'm always pleased with the IQ considering the size.
 
On balance, I think the most sensible route is similar to Malcolm's - put a 45-200 on my G1. Having looked at many XS-1 samples in more detail in various reviews and Flickr, I think they weren't up to the standards of the X10. Maybe the glass isn't up to it.

Anyway, thanks again for all of your input. Peter
 
On balance, I think the most sensible route is similar to Malcolm's - put a 45-200 on my G1. Having looked at many XS-1 samples in more detail in various reviews and Flickr, I think they weren't up to the standards of the X10. Maybe the glass isn't up to it.

Anyway, thanks again for all of your input. Peter


Yup, a 45-200 is the most sensible. They can be picked up for about $250 new and less used. Now, if you're willing to spend a bit more, try the Panasonic 100-300mm, which gives you an effective 600mm at the long end.
 
Back
Top