Well exposed Jpegs of the X20 are a good basis for post processing. This is especially useful for images where the Fuji can show of it's excellent color rendering which is difficult to replicate from RAW. Be careful though to set noise reduction to -2 to avoid detail smearing of the Jpegs.
Fukuya Sushi Bar, Kuala Lumpur International Airport/Malaysia
iso 400
DaveOls wrote:
For almost the same price, you could get the Sony RX 100 with larger sensor and maybe even a smaller body.
I've handled the RX100. It's like a bar of soap. I agree the pics are allright and it rocks at high iso. I'm ok with the Fuji, it's an "old school" (like me) camera of the right size (for me) with proper dials, sensible features and a simple menu system. Plus superior color rendering. If I need technically better results I use my X100 or Nikon D700.
I've shot with the RX100 and I really didn't like it. It was simply uncomfortable to shoot with: Too small and no VF. The X20 is slightly bigger and with OVF. I guess I'd like it better but the jury is still out on this.
rextilleon wrote:
Guys--how is the AF on the X20----is it more like the old X100 or closer to the newer X100S. I'm very impressed with the images it creates.
AF-S it's much faster than the X100. Very good I'd rate it. I haven't tried AF-C yet.
lucdeschepper wrote:
I've handled the RX100. It's like a bar of soap. I agree the pics are allright and it rocks at high iso. I'm ok with the Fuji, it's an "old school" (like me) camera of the right size (for me) with proper dials, sensible features and a simple menu system. Plus superior color rendering. If I need technically better results I use my X100 or Nikon D700.
Interesting to hear such takes on the RX100. As a guy who likes to travel by motorcycle, I've been thinking of acquiring a smaller camera that still takes great photos. I've rented the X20 and really, really like it. I was thinking of renting the RX100 next, but I am concerned that it just might be too small.
lucdeschepper wrote:
I've handled the RX100. It's like a bar of soap. I agree the pics are allright and it rocks at high iso. I'm ok with the Fuji, it's an "old school" (like me) camera of the right size (for me) with proper dials, sensible features and a simple menu system. Plus superior color rendering. If I need technically better results I use my X100 or Nikon D700.
For me the handing of the X series cameras is an important component of using it. Every other compact camera i've handled (except a Leica M, if you count that as "compact") felt like a piece of plastic that takes pictures. I hate electronic motorised zooms, and i don't like holding a camera at arms-length when taking pictures. My X10 feels like a proper camera: The manual zoom adds great tactility, and it has a half decent VF. The X20 fixes the only real failing of the X10 in my opinion - electronic display in the VF. For me, the RX100 might well take better pictures, but it's not as satisfying to use.
Deeje wrote:
Interesting to hear such takes on the RX100. As a guy who likes to travel by motorcycle, I've been thinking of acquiring a smaller camera that still takes great photos. I've rented the X20 and really, really like it. I was thinking of renting the RX100 next, but I am concerned that it just might be too small.
Well, the only way to know is to try it for yourself.
rattymouse wrote:
I am just amazed at how much noise is contained in these X20 pics. A fairly shocking change in how Fujifilm images tend to look.
I wonder if ACR/Lightroom is not dealing well with the RAW - it is very easy to add nasty sharpening artefacts to the X10 EXR files, and it might be the same is true for X-trans files. I push my Fuji files through Capture One now and get much better results.
rattymouse wrote:
I am just amazed at how much noise is contained in these X20 pics. A fairly shocking change in how Fujifilm images tend to look.
I agree. I expected less noise at all iso's. But why then are the X-Pro1 and X-E1 X-Trans sensors praised for their high iso performance, even taking the larger sensor into account? The scaled down X20 version should have been able to show less noise, especially below iso 400. It seems X-Trans tech is not yet mature.
15Bit wrote:
I wonder if ACR/Lightroom is not dealing well with the RAW - it is very easy to add nasty sharpening artefacts to the X10 EXR files, and it might be the same is true for X-trans files. I push my Fuji files through Capture One now and get much better results.
Interesting. Could you share some X20 Capture One results?
Deeje wrote:
Interesting to hear such takes on the RX100. As a guy who likes to travel by motorcycle, I've been thinking of acquiring a smaller camera that still takes great photos. I've rented the X20 and really, really like it. I was thinking of renting the RX100 next, but I am concerned that it just might be too small.
You might also consider the Panasonic LX7. Nice camera, only drawback is the motorized zoom.
