From a conversation on Google+
Corwin - http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnhallmen/sets/72157603532117454/with/2953674051/
"Not exactly what I would say is dull, flat or soft. Its just about processing. I think S5 was pretty good camera. Except that firmware part, which was bit too similar to X100 (Made in Hell - copyright pending - Fuji).
X100 - not much impressive to me
X10 - probably best current compact camera (as long as you take it as compact camera, its not m4/3 or NEX..), not familiar with its firmware though, just photos.
Fuji mirrorless beating M9 eh.. its not fullframe, so it wont be able to beat even x-years old 1Ds. Its like with SD-1, its still APS-C no matter how you look at that. Sensor size does matter, your Pentax 645 photos prove that more than anything, or 6x7 photos compared to APS-C. Scene depth is different.
And I kinda doubt Fuji can match M9 build quality. :) Not mentioning lens which are in case of Fuji usually just "slightly above average".
"Not exactly what I would say is dull, flat or soft. Its just about processing. I think S5 was pretty good camera. Except that firmware part, which was bit too similar to X100 (Made in Hell - copyright pending - Fuji).
X100 - not much impressive to me
X10 - probably best current compact camera (as long as you take it as compact camera, its not m4/3 or NEX..), not familiar with its firmware though, just photos.
Fuji mirrorless beating M9 eh.. its not fullframe, so it wont be able to beat even x-years old 1Ds. Its like with SD-1, its still APS-C no matter how you look at that. Sensor size does matter, your Pentax 645 photos prove that more than anything, or 6x7 photos compared to APS-C. Scene depth is different.
And I kinda doubt Fuji can match M9 build quality. :) Not mentioning lens which are in case of Fuji usually just "slightly above average".
Soundimageplus - "I don't know whether I had a bad one or not, but the S5 Pro I had was, by some distance, the worst DSLR I've ever had. The one I used seemed to have an "industrial strength" AA filter on it, and I just couldn't get any sharpness or bite into the files. The images were also flat and dull, and I couldn't get them to look at all decent without increasing noise and artefacts. I tried absolutely everything to try and improve them and in the end just gave up.
The X100 with its sluggish performance, crazy menus and somewhat lightweight construction was a decent camera in terms of IQ, with particularly good high ISO performance and the best out of camera jpgs. I've ever seen from a digital camera. But I found it a disappointment in reality.
I haven't used the X10, but looking at the raw file samples at Photography Blog - http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_finepix_x10_review/sample_images/ I can't see what all the fuss is about. These aren't any better than any other micro sensor compact camera to my eyes, and indeed I think they look quite unpleasant when viewed close up.
Fuji know how to market a camera, they also know how to photograph it to make it look sexy, and every time I see pictures of this new one, my brain goes into I WANT IT mode. A bit like a Pavlov dog, I start salivating! Its apparently the same size as a Leica M9, is rumoured to have no AA filter, and has those three lovely little prime lenses. 100% guaranteed to punch all my buttons. However I'm now very wary of the difference between Fuji publicity photos and Fuji reality, and remember very clearly how different and unimpressive the X100 was in the flesh as opposed to the camera porn of the Fuji website, which was probably the most seductive website ever for a camera.
I would love this one to live up to the hype. If its faster, (start-up, AF etc.) than the X100, if the menus are logically arranged, if the OVF's framelines actually correspond to the image recorded and if the image quality is something like the current Sony 16MP sensor without an AA filter, then I would buy it and all the lenses in a heartbeat. But my last two Fuji experiences (S5 and X100) have both been somewhat disappointing and not what I thought they would be, so I'm a bit warier this time. I would love it to be what it seems, and not just some pretty rangefinder lookalike that is all style but with flawed content. I guess we now don't have long to wait, and I'm particularly interested in what Dpreview say about it, as they were very involved in getting Fuji to issue their firmware update for the X100.
I'm pleased that Fuji have chosen to pursue the idea of a much cheaper version of the Leica aesthetic, with added modern technology, and if they get it right I believe they will do very well, but once you start imitating the most revered brand in photography, you have to make sure that you do it right. Good looks can get you so far, but for long term success that has to be backed up with good performance too. I really hope that they succeed and that this one is "the real deal". It will certainly be interesting to see what they have come up with."
The X100 with its sluggish performance, crazy menus and somewhat lightweight construction was a decent camera in terms of IQ, with particularly good high ISO performance and the best out of camera jpgs. I've ever seen from a digital camera. But I found it a disappointment in reality.
I haven't used the X10, but looking at the raw file samples at Photography Blog - http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_finepix_x10_review/sample_images/ I can't see what all the fuss is about. These aren't any better than any other micro sensor compact camera to my eyes, and indeed I think they look quite unpleasant when viewed close up.
Fuji know how to market a camera, they also know how to photograph it to make it look sexy, and every time I see pictures of this new one, my brain goes into I WANT IT mode. A bit like a Pavlov dog, I start salivating! Its apparently the same size as a Leica M9, is rumoured to have no AA filter, and has those three lovely little prime lenses. 100% guaranteed to punch all my buttons. However I'm now very wary of the difference between Fuji publicity photos and Fuji reality, and remember very clearly how different and unimpressive the X100 was in the flesh as opposed to the camera porn of the Fuji website, which was probably the most seductive website ever for a camera.
I would love this one to live up to the hype. If its faster, (start-up, AF etc.) than the X100, if the menus are logically arranged, if the OVF's framelines actually correspond to the image recorded and if the image quality is something like the current Sony 16MP sensor without an AA filter, then I would buy it and all the lenses in a heartbeat. But my last two Fuji experiences (S5 and X100) have both been somewhat disappointing and not what I thought they would be, so I'm a bit warier this time. I would love it to be what it seems, and not just some pretty rangefinder lookalike that is all style but with flawed content. I guess we now don't have long to wait, and I'm particularly interested in what Dpreview say about it, as they were very involved in getting Fuji to issue their firmware update for the X100.
I'm pleased that Fuji have chosen to pursue the idea of a much cheaper version of the Leica aesthetic, with added modern technology, and if they get it right I believe they will do very well, but once you start imitating the most revered brand in photography, you have to make sure that you do it right. Good looks can get you so far, but for long term success that has to be backed up with good performance too. I really hope that they succeed and that this one is "the real deal". It will certainly be interesting to see what they have come up with."
