Fuji X100 - X100S Comparison

[Steve B.]

See:

https://fredrikaverpil.tumblr.com%2Fpost%2F44849668414

No opinion on whether this is accurate or not.

 

[ean10775]

Frederik has done some pretty good analysis and tracking of some of the 'quirks' of the X100 in the past and seems dedicated to offering useful insights on these cameras. While everyone will have different opinions, I tend to value his.

 

[Steve B.]

Frederik has done some pretty good analysis and tracking of some of the 'quirks' of the X100 in the past and seems dedicated to offering useful insights on these cameras. While everyone will have different opinions, I tend to value his.

If it's accurate I am going to be very happy when Adorama ships my camera!

 

[Pelao]

And here I am thinking the 100 was an incredible camera. The s is shaping to be something very special.

 

[spinyman]

This is great positive reenforcement!

 

[Pelao]

RobertJ on the Fuji X forum has his. One comment caught my eye:

AF is super-quick, reminds me of using an OM-D with the 12-50.

 

[flysurfer]

I have started a tiny X100S vs. X100 shootout with a few pics today. There's more to come on the next days, of course. Hopefully, I'll have a good grasp of what's new and better for next Fridays's X-PERT CORNER. But why wait, click here and see the early work in progress now if you are interested in this kind of comparison. I was using firmware 1.01.

A few immediate observations:

1. X100S sensor appears to be a little less sensitive than X100 sensor.

2. Fuji has changed the gradation of their film simulation modes in the X100S, notably Provia, which now offers more shadow contrast and is now at the same level as Astia in this respect.

If not noted otherwise, all JPEG SOOC samples were processed in-camera with standard settings for sharpening, NR, color and contrast.

Also, the AF trick seems to work with the X100S, as well:

DSCF0037 - X100S "AF trick" by ricopress, on Flickr

 

[ean10775]

Rico, what do you mean by #1 the sensor is less sensitive?

 

[flysurfer]

That means that the sensor's sensitivity is lower.

 

[ean10775]

So similar to the sensor on the X-Pro 1/X-E1 and it's 'optimistic' ISO ratings?

 

[flysurfer]

So similar to the sensor on the X-Pro 1/X-E1 and it's 'optimistic' ISO ratings?

Did you measure the difference? My software says 0.08 EV when I compare the Lightroom results. The rest comes from a difference in midtone contrast, the X100S offers more.

You can buy rated, dedicated exposure meters for 800 USD a piece that will guarantee you less precise results with more than 0.1 EV deviation. Fully within specs.

 

[flysurfer]

DSCF0029 - X100S Lightroom 4.4RC by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1084 - X100 Lightroom 4.4RC (WB adjusted to X100S sample) by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0032 - X100S Lightroom 4.4RC by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1088 - X100 Lightroom 4.4RC (WB adjusted to X100S sample) by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0034 - X100S Lightroom 4.4RC by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1090 -X100 Lightroom 4.4RC (WB adjusted to X100S sample) by ricopress, on Flickr

 

[ean10775]

I'm just speaking based on what I've read in reviews. I've haven't done any testing myself with my X-E1 as it really isn't all that important to me - I was just asking out of curiosity.

 

[flysurfer]

I'm just speaking based on what I've read in reviews. I've haven't done any testing myself with my X-E1 as it really isn't all that important to me - I was just asking out of curiosity.

Oh sure, this is even in my book, but an overall lower ISO is different from tiny variations between two cameras. As I once wrote, even Fuji Velvia was rated ISO 50, but had to be exposed like ISO 40 to get it right. So theses things really do have kind of a tradition.

 

[flysurfer]

The sun came out for a few minutes before it vanished for today, a good time to take a quick snap with the X100S...

DSCF0136 - Lightroom 4.4RC / Aperture by ricopress, on Flickr

If you'd let it, the camera would certainly choose DR200% or DR400% for this shot (it actually couldn't use DR400% at f2 without engaging the ND filter, as its maximum shutter speed is restriced to 1/1000s at f2, and DR400% requires ISO 800 exposure), but as you can see, in situations like this, there's often no need to rescue any highlights. It's actually quite nice to have very bright highlights in this shot.

For reference, here's the SOOC Provia JPEG version with default settings:

DSCF0136 - JPEG SOOC Provia by ricopress, on Flickr

As you can see, I didn't really change that much.

 

[taz98spin]

The more I see photos from the X100s, I want it!!

 

[flysurfer]

I have added a few comparison samples at very small apertures that demonstrate diffraction. The LMO in the X100S is supposed to reduce this effect in JPEGs from the camera:

DSCF0153 - X100S f8 by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0152 - X100S f11 by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0151 - X100S f16 by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1123 - X100 f8 by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1122 - X100 f11 by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF1121 - X100 f16 by ricopress, on Flickr

 

[flysurfer]

Here's another demo shot at f16, once processed from a OOC JPEG and once from Lightroom:

DSCF0154 - f16, JPEG Pro Neg. Hi & Aperture (Delta 3200) by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0139 - f16, Lightroom 4.4RC & Aperture (Delta 3200) by ricopress, on Flickr

 

[flysurfer]

Here are Silkypix 5 versions of the two f16 samples:

DSCF0139 - f16, Silkypix 5 & Aperture by ricopress, on Flickr

DSCF0140 - f16, Silkypix 5 & Aperture by ricopress, on Flickr

 

[flysurfer]

Here we go: my comparison is in!