Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Watering Hole' started by Herman, Sep 6, 2011.
Bigger sensor than most, Fast Lens, Very Decent OVF
Its what the G12 should have been
I reckon that about sums it up. Not a lot more to say until we get our hands on it
Thanks for the replies.
I like manual zoom, retro design, raw option, pixel bounding options, feel and like of rangefinder camera, sensor size, fast lens, integrated ovf.
ISO access via menu?
I just like it. It's all I need
If you have an LX5 or an S95 or a G12 and want a better one, the X10 looks like it, with an accordingly higher price tag. If you have an m43 or an APS sensor camera and you see this as competition for those, I seriously doubt it will measure up, but I guess time will tell. Looks to me like a slightly more premium premium compact....
I know the files of my former Nikon D90, the Olympus E-P1 and the Canon G12. I have never been able to see that much difference between the G12 and the E-PL1 as I can see between the E-PL1 and the D90. I think that it is possible, that a sensor using latest technology could outperform the E-PL1, even if it is significantly smaller. However, I am not really sure, if 2/3" could be large enough for doing so, but at least I don't expect a big difference.
I hope DXO mark reviews this camera. I haven't seen much in the way of reviews of the EXR CMOS sensor from fuji. It could be interesting to see how it performs.
I agree that in good light, the differences are small. But in poor light or when you need a bit more DR, the differences become more obvious, both between a premium compact and m43 and between m43 and APS. I can shoot my X100 very comfortably at ISO 3200 and stretch to 6400 in a pinch and could do the same with the Nex I had. I can shoot my m43 gear very comfortably at 1600 and stretch to 3200 in a pinch. With my GRD3 and the LX5 and S90 I used to have, I'm only comfortable with 400 and 800 is a stretch. In good light, they're all capable of great quality (although there's definitely more latitude in the shadows and highlights with m43 than with compacts and with APS than with m43), but I think there are some very real differences as the light dims...
The X10 is not that compact. It's close to the X100 size, larger than the compact zooms it is compared too (XZ-1, LX5, etc).
Thanks for that info: Andrew I wondered at the size and if it was roughly the same as the XZ-1; wish I had know about this camera before I bought the XZ-1...but that's life....isn't?
Penny, there are going to always be new cameras around the corner! The XZ-1 is a great camera, no doubt about it.
Is it? :roll eyes:
Time will tell!
IMHO the XZ-1 is a great camera.
Had the X-10 been out would I have chosen it over the XZ?
Tough question that is. I would have to have held each in person to decide.
Is it really... larger I mean... hmm... that could affect my decision adversely. Not really interested in having another big compact, having just disposed of my G11.
 Just looked at a side by side comparison in dpreview.com, of the X10, with all the other slightly larger sensor compacts. I'm no longer in any way certain that I want this camera.
X10: 117 x 70 x 57 mm (4.61 x 2.76 x 2.24")
X100: 126 x 75 x 54 mm (4.96 x 2.95 x 2.13")
XZ-1: 111 x 65 x 42 mm (4.37 x 2.56 x 1.65")
LX5: 110 x 65 x 43 mm (4.33 x 2.56 x 1.69")
G12: 112 x 76 x 48 mm (4.41 x 2.99 x 1.89")
I'm sighing with relief now,,, re: Sue's comparisons also having the ZX-1 with 28mm at its widest and the tiny S95 with its 24mm why on earth do I even think about the X10?
That is my problem with the X10 - size. It looks to be a terrific camera for what it is, but I was hopeful that Fuji would do a large sensor compact more in line with its Natura line of film cameras.
For the same reasons many thought about and even bought the X100. Its sensor might just be notably better than the competition (as was the X100 relative to m43), its got some apparently nice controls, and its got an OVF that requires it to be a bit bigger than the competition. It doesn't hit any of my current wants or needs but if I was considering a premium compact and wasn't so size obsessed to have limited my search to the S95 (the only of these cameras that's REALLY pocketable), the Fuji would be in the mix and the OVF might be enough to sell it. I mean, once the camera can't really slip into a pants pocket, what's the difference between an LX5 and an XZ1 and an X10 in practical terms - you still have to carry it somehow and the difference in the size of the small case or the amount of room it takes in a bag or purse aren't really much to worry about. Or the Fuji jpegs. Or just because it looks more like a real camera than some of the others (not an issue to me, but don't discount its appeal).
As I said, I'm not in the market (and hope I don't go all irrational and buy one for my wife anyway - she really doesn't want a new camera), but if I was, I could see the appeal. Depending on what the reality turns out to be. But I can tell you that on a smaller sensor camera like this one Fuji BETTER put AUTO ISO and the manual ISO settings on the SAME menu, which they haven't seen fit to do on the X100. Its arguably not a terrible flaw on the X100 given how good it is at high ISO and how easy it is to just trust AUTO ISO to do its job. But on a camera with a sensor about a quarter of the size of m43, that just wouldn't fly...
Hah, so funny Ray. Now I know I'm not alone. Somehow my family members all have cameras they don't want or need, but that I appreciate. Case in point, my 9 year old has a Yashica T4 - ridiculous but awesome.