Fuji X10 to X20 - Is it worth upgrading? A PERSONAL view...


Bring Jack back!
Houston, Texas
Real Name
I brought a SD card with me yesterday to the local camera shop, and took several RAW + Fine Large photos with the X20. I then pixel peeped the photos of my go-to sales guy at the shop in LR 4.4. Talk about night and day difference between JPG vs. RAW. That JPG engine is for sure killing the X20's files.

For pixel peeping purposes, ISO 800 RAW starts losing significant detail due to the noise. But ISO 400 is still good enough. The RAWs still look significantly better than the JPG though at 400 and 800 in spite of the noise.

I hope Fuji comes up a firmware soon to adjust the JPG engine.

Lawrence A.

Hall of Famer
New Mexico
Real Name
I think 800 is still OK for portraits with careful processing of the raw file, maybe not up to 16x20, but I'l bet you could get a pleasing 11x14.
The easiest way to think of the X10 and the X20 is to think of an automobile (this is easier in the EU) that's available with a roughly horsepower-equivalent gas or diesel engine.

The X10 is EXR-based. After the massive problems they encountered with it, it was a no-brainer that the 10's follow on would either be massively improved via EXR, or EXR would be thrown over the side. And since Fuji was on a well-recieved roll with X-Trans in the X100, Xpro, etc., that was their work-around, and 'voila, here's your X20, all new with X-Trans. And since the various PP vendors were on their way to getting X-Trans in other Fuji cameras, this also answered that complaint as well.

I like that they included the new info in the updated finder. Glad they added a 'Soft EFX' preset in the Art Filters, as filters are problematic in this size. The added film sims are nice (but man, ONE day Fuji will per-fect a proper VELVIA sim . . . . . . but it's not today). I like the eye-sensor.

I like the X20 and will get one as a companion to my X10, not a replacement. The same Fabulous lens on two DIFFERENT cameras. Like always, you find what they like and don't like, and work out from there.


Hall of Famer
Jersey Shore
Real Name
So... is there a general consensus that:

A) If one shoots primarily jpg's, the X10 gives better results than the X20

B) If one is shooting primarily raw, the X20 gives better results - particularly if one knows what one is doing with one of the better raw converters

C) In terms of features, the X20 is better - particularly because of the information provided in the OVF

These are questions aimed at boiling down the conclusions of this string - not statements.

And what is the general consensus regarding auto-focus performance between the two cameras?

Latest threads

Top Bottom