* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

Fuji x10, any fans?

Hi all. I generally work with dslr’s, which provide excellent image quality, but I’m finding it more and more frustrating how conspicuous a big, black DSLR with a 2.8 lens is when it’s dangling from ones shoulder or being pointed at person. Thus I’ve been considering the new Fuji x10 quite seriously. The X100 is great, but having one focal length is quite limiting. The Canon G Seies are the benchmark, but they never felt quite right in my hands. Just today I came out of a camera shop where I had a hands-on with an X10 and loved it. I’m just worried about image quality, especially with the RAW files which I’ve heard can be quite a hassle in Lightroom and with Camera RAW.

does anyone have any experience with this new and unique little camera?

by Daylin Paul at 2012-10-05 04:33:04 UTC | Bookmark | | Report spam→

I am a fan.

I am convinced it is a very capable litle machine for many purposes.

First thing to answer is IQ: IQ is good, and these days you shouldn’t compromise anymore on that. This x10 is sharp and colors and details and whatever is in a photo, all that, its all there. The files are large enough for a double page in National Geographic so thats covered as well. And it should be for that prize.

We have an f2 lens yeah!: Okay the lens is fast and that is very very good, but dof is as wide as shooting with an iPhone. Good though is that there is hardly any CA or other weird stuff at f2…its just good quality all the time.

We have a viewfinder: Yes but the paralax is worse then the eyes overlooking the glasses of that retired Bangladesh Airways pilot while he is looking through the bottom of a gin botle while smoking a cigaret, landing the plane. It sucks but you will survive.

We have a zoom lens: That works well! Its a charm and really good instead of only having a 35mm lens like the x100. And it ends at f2.8 which is really impressive…and good!

So looking at these 3 things, besides that you can shoot in AV, raw, and have actual physical dials to compensate exposure, what else is important? Ah you have a manual zoom…thats intuitive…and works…its great to have that connection to your body and extend senses.

The litle fucker is so small…its a delight. You can take images of whatever…most people think its a mobile phone :-)))))

Now I come to the RAW part and that is a dark story:

The Raw of fuji is a part almost not-discussed on ze internet as far as I know. mostly cos a bunch of amateurs are using the x10…I guess then…I looked for raw + Fuji info on google!

The following text will tell how you best handle the Fuji x10 Raw files.

1. Do not shoot in Jpeg. People say its good but its not. The Raw file has more for you.
2. Do not convert raws in silky pix or whatever it is called.
3. Shoot raw, then convert to DNG and then convert to tiff or Jpeg in camera raw.

Why? For some reason if you shoot jpeg only you lose like 20 or more pixels on every side of your image. Duh? Yup!Weird? Yes totally weird but it is a fact!

If you shoot raw and convert with silky pix you still lose these pixels and your images look worse then the jpeg from the camera…hard to believe how Fuji manages to fuck you like that but..yeah…i checked it and did the tests…myself :-(

But…if you convert the Raws to DNG (with the free dng convertor) and then import these DNG’s into Camera Raw your images finally show their real potential: then They are not even ‘larger’ (a lot of pixels on all sides…they actually look really good, more subdued, more dynamic range, all in all a better image to publish or start working with in PS if you want so!

And for these 2 last lines here above and ‘cos its an all black camera body people don’t object to be photographed with …I like this litle black box.But for sure I like the next generation better when Fuji, Canon…closes the gap with Leica…in 1-2 yaers?

Would I recommend this small motherfucker?

I would only recommend it to people that know what they want and what they are doing…otherwise get a canon s100 or so?


by Tom Van Cakenberghe | 05 Oct 2012 20:10 (ed. Oct 5 2012) | Kathmandu, Nepal | | Report spam→
I have an X100 and an X Pro-1. I love them because the are small, quite and provide great image quality. They can be a little finicky especially with focus. I use them for documentary work they are not very good for fast moving subjects like sports.

by Braden Gunem | 05 Oct 2012 21:10 | Colorado, United States | | Report spam→
I bet you lose those pixels because it’s correcting lens distortion.

by DPC | 05 Oct 2012 21:10 | Paris, France | | Report spam→
Has been my main camera since may of this year. I like very much. Sometimes the autofocus get in a twist, and a little lag with the shutter as it tries to focus. But apart from that I am really enjoying the lens range, the size of the camera and sweet quietness of the shutter.
here are is an example of photos http://magicmonkeys.net/photo/DoctorsAthensGreece2012/index.html
Pierre Alozie

by Pierre Alozie | 05 Oct 2012 21:10 | Hounoux, France | | Report spam→
DPC I know what you mean but its not that.

It really drops like 20 px or more (i forgot and can not test as my wife hijacked the camera and she is gone for 2 weeks) on all sides in jpeg ‘and’ raw to jpeg in Slky pix :-p, thats a huge amount of info.

I discovered it while looking for a good workflow not too much different from my usual workflow. I was going through images in Photomechanic and they were all slightly zooming in going from raw to tiffs….i never saw that with any other camera. And then i started testing it and came to this conclusion. Oly one guy burried deep i a google search brought it up somewhere.

Anyway cool camera and the af might be not super fast but its a hell faster then my 85mm f1.2 lens.

I wish my wife quit her job and came back so i can shoot with the x10 :-)

@Pierre: its weird you dont mention that loss of pixels in jpeg…

by Tom Van Cakenberghe | 06 Oct 2012 11:10 (ed. Oct 6 2012) | Kathmandu, Nepal | | Report spam→
Thanks for all this useful information guys, I’m much obliged. I think I’m gonna get it and use the RAW to DNG workflow that Tom recommended. Great stuff!

by Daylin Paul | 07 Oct 2012 01:10 | | Report spam→
I use this X10 too, along with an X100. Makes for a good combination when I don’t need to carry a DSLR.

There is also an X10 Firmware Update Ver.2.00 just out giving a Q menu (as on X-Pro1) here:


by Matthew Richards | 07 Oct 2012 04:10 | Phi Mai, Thailand | | Report spam→
I’ve used it for 10 months now and like it for it’s size, but it does have serious limitations. I have missed quite a few shots from faulty metering or slow focus. The DOF doesn’t even match a DSLR w/ a good lens so I wouldn’t rely on it for an important shoot. Fugi just replaced my original X10 for a new one because of the “blooming effect” or white orbs when shooting into bright light, a problem with the 1st gen. batch. I’m selling it & looking at buying the XE1, the smaller, lighter version of the XPro1.

by Robb Goodell | 09 Oct 2012 04:10 | Seoul, Korea (South) | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→


Daylin Paul, Photographer Daylin Paul
Port Elizabeth , South Africa
Tom Van Cakenberghe, Tom Van Cakenberghe
Kathmandu , Nepal
Braden Gunem, Photographer Braden Gunem
Lagos , Nigeria
DPC, Photographer DPC
Paris , France
Pierre Alozie, photojournalist Pierre Alozie
London , United Kingdom
Matthew Richards, Photojournalist Matthew Richards
Bang Saphan , Thailand
Robb Goodell, Photographer Robb Goodell
Bozeman , United States


Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2015 November Eleven