warbandit wrote:
Loving all of the images posted so far... subscribed
Am contemplating getting one of these as a more compact alternative to lugging around the usual SLR...
Some of those low-light shots are amazing. What's the max ISO that's still useable?
I think it depends on what you are willing to accept. Personally i'm unhappy above ISO 400, but my main camera is a 5D and i'm (unfairly) judging the X10 against that. I'm also comparing RAW's, whilst the half size EXR files are probably a lot cleaner.
For me the biggest problem with the X10 is the generally average support for the RAW format. It is the only camera i know of where the internal jpeg conversion retains more detail than external converters. In ACR at least it is a tricky balance between detail, sharpening and noise reduction.
rattymouse wrote:
You know, I haven't drawn a line on that yet. I like to keep it under ISO3200 but I believe that with good settings and PP, ISO3200 could yield useable images. Certainly 1600 is good.
Thanks for the info. A lot of your night street shots on the first few pages of this thread look pretty good to me, but it looks like you've removed the EXIF info so I wasn't able to see what ISOs you were using.
15Bit wrote:
For me the biggest problem with the X10 is the generally average support for the RAW format. It is the only camera i know of where the internal jpeg conversion retains more detail than external converters. In ACR at least it is a tricky balance between detail, sharpening and noise reduction.
What do you mean by "average support for the RAW format"? Can you not open the RAW files in programs like Lightroom and Photoshop? What's wrong with ACR?
Just cos you can open them doesn't mean they do a good job in the conversion.
I've not played with Capture One 6 (i have v5 which doesn't support the X10) but with ACR i can't extract quite the same level of detail from RAW files as i see from the in-camera jpegs. I'm not alone in this. Push up the sharpening to try to give an equivalent level of detail and you get a sort of blotchy noise. I think its due to ACR being optimised for Bayer type sensors, and the algorithms don't work so well on the EXR arrangement. I also find that LR4 is noticeably slower with X10 files than with the similarly sized 5D files. Many users report also not being able to get equivalent output even from the RAW converter that ships with the camera (SilkyPix). Putting a positive spin on this though, you could say its due to the high quality of the in-camera jpegs...
Another thing i have noticed - the X10 gives better output at 6MP than at 12MP. Lower noise AND higher detail when viewed at equivalent levels of magnification. This is true in both RAW and jpeg. It is a very interesting sensor that they put in there...
Any chance Fuji will release software that can specifically handle the EXR RAWs? I suppose all of the details are there, it's just a matter of being able to tap into them...
I don't really understand why they haven't implemented the same algorithms into Silkypix that they use in-camera. I think our best hope is that the EXR sensors become sufficiently popular that Adobe spend some time tweaking ACR.
There are a couple of things i should throw in here. The first is that you can actually process RAW files in-camera. I've not really played with this yet, but its a nice touch.
The second thing is that i don't want to come across as a dissatisfied owner, as i'm not. I can get output from ACR that is very good, and more than good enough for my needs. Though i haven't tried yet, i reckon acceptable prints at A3 should be possible at low ISO's. So my earlier comments are more observations than complaints. The general quality and handling of the camera is really superb. The manual zoom in particular is inspired. My only complaint would be the complexity of the various EXR and non-EXR modes you can set it to run in, and the poor explanation of these in the user manual. It is most confusing if you want to shoot RAW though. Shooting jpeg you can put it in auto EXR mode and it will do a good job most of the time.
15Bit wrote:
I don't really understand why they haven't implemented the same algorithms into Silkypix that they use in-camera. I think our best hope is that the EXR sensors become sufficiently popular that Adobe spend some time tweaking ACR.
There are a couple of things i should throw in here. The first is that you can actually process RAW files in-camera. I've not really played with this yet, but its a nice touch.
The second thing is that i don't want to come across as a dissatisfied owner, as i'm not. I can get output from ACR that is very good, and more than good enough for my needs. Though i haven't tried yet, i reckon acceptable prints at A3 should be possible at low ISO's. So my earlier comments are more observations than complaints. The general quality and handling of the camera is really superb. The manual zoom in particular is inspired. My only complaint would be the complexity of the various EXR and non-EXR modes you can set it to run in, and the poor explanation of these in the user manual. It is most confusing if you want to shoot RAW though. Shooting jpeg you can put it in auto EXR mode and it will do a good job most of the time. ...Show more →
EXR cameras have been around for 5 years. It has not caught on even after that length of time.
In camera raw processing is nice, but VERY clumsy to use. A real test of patience.
The in camera processing did strike me as a bit fiddly, which is why i haven't really played with it yet.
Its a shame the EXR hasn't caught on, but its perhaps a bit too out of the ordinary or just not well enough optimised yet. Personally i would call my X10 a 6MP camera, not a 12MP camera, as it seems to give much better results at half resolution. But in this day and age even the 12MP headline number is a bit small (look at the RX100, for example), and for sure the general public won't buy a 6MP camera not matter how good you tell them it is. It is interesting that the X100 is not an EXR sensor.
Another from the summer, just to keep the pictures rolling with the discussion:
After looking for some handy "good" P&S, I finally picked X10..
But thinking of returning,
First, +++
1) Great handling (now thinking of moving X100 )
2) (Output) Quality is great, esp .jpg..
3) Liked the manual Zoom concept.
4) Quality of view screen is good.
5) Liking the digital "Level".
(Basically, have all the positives to jump on the camera based on specs, but eventually its handling & real life usage which matters)
Now, ----
1) Autofocus control (single point focusing is crap, atleast after using manual focussing for so many years)
2) No info in optical viewfinder, though you can guess A/T values by looking down. Still, focusing will be pure random function (Making optical VF useless).
3) Now missing On/Off switch after a week of usage. The camera keep trying focusing while you are not using. And rotating zoom ring to switch off all the time, dont even think. (Pretty big Negative to me).
4) Not liking the results of fill-Flash.
5) Though electronic view Finder is big, but all the information is provided on the dark bar overlapping the view. There is 5% space on both the side of bar to guess what in the view. This is the worst feature of this gem. (Deal Breaker).
6) Useless Self-Timer: Every time you switch off the camera, the self time function goes Null (means, every time you switch on the camera, you have to select Self timer from Menu). I went literally crazy in Museum. Cant keep the camera ON (read pt3, and selecting Self Timer every few minutes was hassle in milder term)
I am planning to send camera back. Its a great camera, but not for very creative usage. And once you are paying this $$$ amount, last thing you want to use the camera competing your phone camera.
I would comment that AF on all compact cameras is rubbish compared to an SLR. Expecting better than rubbish *will* lead to disappointment.
The optical VF would be vastly better as a hybrid like the X100, but that would price the camera up a level. Its better than most P&S though
The absence of an ON/OFF switch occasionally bugs me too, but only when i want to view shots i've already taken. The continuous focus thing depends on the focus mode you have chosen. Check that in the manual.
The fill flash works ok for me, but i don't have high expectations of it.
The thing that bothers me most about the X10 is the complexity of the all different modes you can set and the poor description of these in the manual.
asbalyan wrote:
After looking for some handy "good" P&S, I finally picked X10..
But thinking of returning,
First, +++
1) Great handling (now thinking of moving X100 )
2) (Output) Quality is great, esp .jpg..
3) Liked the manual Zoom concept.
4) Quality of view screen is good.
5) Liking the digital "Level".
(Basically, have all the positives to jump on the camera based on specs, but eventually its handling & real life usage which matters)
Now, ----
1) Autofocus control (single point focusing is crap, atleast after using manual focussing for so many years)
2) No info in optical viewfinder, though you can guess A/T values by looking down. Still, focusing will be pure random function (Making optical VF useless).
3) Now missing On/Off switch after a week of usage. The camera keep trying focusing while you are not using. And rotating zoom ring to switch off all the time, dont even think. (Pretty big Negative to me).
4) Not liking the results of fill-Flash.
5) Though electronic view Finder is big, but all the information is provided on the dark bar overlapping the view. There is 5% space on both the side of bar to guess what in the view. This is the worst feature of this gem. (Deal Breaker).
6) Useless Self-Timer: Every time you switch off the camera, the self time function goes Null (means, every time you switch on the camera, you have to select Self timer from Menu). I went literally crazy in Museum. Cant keep the camera ON (read pt3, and selecting Self Timer every few minutes was hassle in milder term)
I am planning to send camera back. Its a great camera, but not for very creative usage. And once you are paying this $$$ amount, last thing you want to use the camera competing your phone camera.
(about results, will post in a day or two)......Show more →
Not much action for the x10 around here I take it? Thought I'd give this a bump and see what happens. Anyway, like for many others it was love at first touch for me. Read up on it (and all its quirks) for a couple of days and decided I would take the plunge and see how we get along. My initial impression is that it's an absolute joy to shoot with and that I found myself thinking that it challenges me a bit as a photographer. It makes me think a bit more than usual about what I'm doing, and I like that. I've always thought that working with limitations can often be the best boost for creativity. No chance for portraits with this camera yet but I'm thinking I would likely go for a tight framing, zoomed in all the way. And go for a BW edit most of the time. Looks good in my head, so to speak, but time will tell.
Anyway, here are a few shots from my one and so far only time out with it. All processed from jpeg. I did try a couple of raw files in LR4 but, as others have reported, had no luck matching the jpegs in detail&sharpness. Maybe I'll try converting to tiff in SilkyPix and then having another go in LR later.
Wow, your first pic is fantastic. Perfect composition.
15Bit wrote:
They say the best camera is the one you have with you, and that's where the X10 scores over my SLR - its always with me
Oh yes. And I thought my Nex were gonna do that for me. Turns out I still wanted something even smaller/less obtrusive without the need to switch lenses (I use almost entirely primes). Sure, I could have gotten the E-mount kit lens, but the X10 is just way more fun. I felt like indulging a little and asked myself if I deserved one. Turns out I did
)
