Fuji X10 - Baby sibling to X100 announced

[Hamish Gill]

Fuji have announced the new X10
With a 28-112 f/2-f2.8 zoom lens smaller body, smaller non hybrid finder and what appears to be a c.£500 (although this appears from mooching online to be rumor) price tag it looks to be a competitor to the Canon G12 and Nikon P7100.
It appears to have styling and build quality consistent with its bigger brother the x100, as well as having RAW and full manual overrides.

I shant bang on to much about the spec as this can be found within fuji's press release here http://fujifilm.co.uk/presscentre/news/index.php?id=1444

[video=youtube;ZFaEH0eIAoM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFaEH0eIAoM[/video]

link to their "micro-site" http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/en/index.html

I have to say, I really like the look of this camera, it appears to me to be getting back to basics of what a compact camera should do as opposed to getting bogged down with superfluous features like most (even Fuji's) compact cameras do. I guess we will have to wait and see what the smaller 2/3" sensor can do!

 

[Hamish Gill]

Our mates red box cameras seem to be taking pre orders
http://www.redboxcameras.com/product/fuji_finepix_x10_exr_cmos_-_12mp_4x_zoom/

 

[Chris Dodkin]

nice find Hamish - looks like another winner

Fuji are carving out a market below Leica - the others better catch up fast!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

mmm no hybrid viewfinder?

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

Our mates red box cameras seem to be taking pre orders
http://www.redboxcameras.com/product/fuji_finepix_x10_exr_cmos_-_12mp_4x_zoom/

Thanks for the mention...got a slap on the wrist for releasing info a bit early by mistake...ooopps

but yes we will be taking pre-orders now for it, but have had to add a stupid price on it until the final pricing comes in from Fuji

as soon as i have one in my hands i will give first impressions.

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

mmm no hybrid viewfinder?

nope looks like just an optical one

Fujifilm’s engineers have used an arrangement of 3 aspherical lenses plus a special dach prism configuration to deliver a viewfinder with superior brightness and a superb field of view with its extra wide viewing angle, and all whilst still maintaining a compact camera size. This, combined with the Manual Barrel Zoom functionality, makes a real difference and brings a welcome old-style photographic feel to the X10

 

[Hamish Gill]

yeah http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/en/product/finder/index.html
no mention of hybrid finder... maybe a trick missed there?
but i imagine thats where a lot of the cost is in the x100, that and the lens ... ?

(feel free to retweet our tweet Oliver )

 

[Chris Dodkin]

The zoom is good - the looks and build are clearly a key point

Image quality TBD

Price looks about right - wonder how it will impact the current X100 market?

I'm seeing plenty of new and 'used' X100s on Craigslist with prices from list, through 'you must be f-ing crazy!'

 

[Larry Bolch]

I doubt that it will have a negative impact upon the X100, in fact it may have the opposite effect. It would not surprise me to see X10 owners either upgrading to an X100, adding an X100. The two would make a quite nice combination. The 2/3" sensor is quite large for a camera of this type, but no where near the size of the X100's APS-C. None the less, it has the potential to show up very well against the Nikon, Canon and Panasonic enthusiast compacts. The X100 is a step beyond, with low light performance and overall image quality rivaling my D700.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Hands on video at Engadget

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/03/fujifilm-x10-hands-on-video/

 

[Hamish Gill]

Id be interested to see how effective this exr resolution drop thing is for lower light photography ...
That has always been a little bit of me that is disappointed that Fuji didn't take a big gamble an put a lower res, but even better in low light sensor in the x100 ... IMO there needs to be a brave, more documented halt to this ever increasing pixel count in compact cameras ... Most would agree I'm sure that the pixel race, even in the minds of at least some consumers, ended a while ago now ... So why do companies persist?

 

[Larry Bolch]

Evidently a lot of gear-heads still buy on the basis of "mine is bigger than yours".

"It allows me to crop more."—use your zoom lens or your feet to get closer.

"It lets me print bigger."—how large do you regularly print, and have you actually tested?

In the past few years, if really high resolution images are required, stitching is now a no-brainer.

 

[Hamish Gill]

You would think there would be some realisation that when you have, what is effectively a 6x crop factor sensor (1/2.5") you just don't have the space for 16 million adequately sized pixels ... Technology has moved on allowing more pixels to fit into a smaller size. But at the same time with the ever increasing numbers of pixels image quality hasn't actually got any better! Compact camera image quality has remained basically the same for about 4 years now ... We have gained high power zooms in small cameras and large pixel counts, but rarely better quality... IMO, and please take this with a pinch of salt as ita based on guess work and application of logic rather than actual real knowledge ... If the same technology was applied to fitting larger pixels instead of more small ones on to these tiny sensors we would have better overall quality!
In fact it seems to me that this is blindingly obvious ... Especially when you look at nikons top end (d3s vs d3x)

I dunno, I'm sort of pointlessly ranting here ... I just gets on my nerves so much that at the consumer level everything is driven so strongly by numbers on a page rather than actual useability/quality

Ok this x10 has a 4x (aprox) crop factor (2/3") sensor which is bigger than the Nikon p7100 and canon g12 etc 4.5x (1/.7") but it's still 12mp ... The same res as the x100 with a 1.5x crop factor sensor and (for that matter) my 1x crop factor d3... Why not drop the res to 6mp, achieve a closer pixel size and go for overall better quality than the ability to print big - which as you rightly point out hardly anyone in the consumer market does anyway!

The answer is of course, to repeat my self, and to reiterate you ... Numbers/specs on paper

 

[Chris Dodkin]

I think Canon bit the resolution bullet going from the G10 to the G11 & G12, and actually 'downsizing' the resolution. 14.7 to 10 MP, whilst getting 2.6 f-stops more dynamic range into the G12.

That's a ballsy move when, as you say, many people are buying cameras based on MP count.

 

[Larry Bolch]

Compact camera image quality has remained basically the same for about 4 years now ... We have gained high power zooms in small cameras and large pixel counts, but rarely better quality... IMO, and please take this with a pinch of salt as ita based on guess work and application of logic rather than actual real knowledge ... If the same technology was applied to fitting larger pixels instead of more small ones on to these tiny sensors we would have better overall quality!
In fact it seems to me that this is blindingly obvious ... Especially when you look at nikons top end (d3s vs d3x)

During the film era, there were the InstaMatics, 110 film film discs and one-time use cameras, all with lousy quality and the sold in huge numbers. Now cell-phones are crowding the P&S market and the uploads I see on Facebook range from dismal to horrid. Obviously for a large segment of the camera buying public, image quality simply is not an issue.

I dunno, I'm sort of pointlessly ranting here ... I just gets on my nerves so much that at the consumer level everything is driven so strongly by numbers on a page rather than actual useability/quality

If my P&S is 24MP and yours is only 14MP, yours is a trifle short compared to mine.

Ok this x10 has a 4x (aprox) crop factor (2/3") sensor which is bigger than the Nikon p7100 and canon g12 etc 4.5x (1/.7") but it's still 12mp ... The same res as the x100 with a 1.5x crop factor sensor and (for that matter) my 1x crop factor d3... Why not drop the res to 6mp, achieve a closer pixel size and go for overall better quality than the ability to print big - which as you rightly point out hardly anyone in the consumer market does anyway!

The answer is of course, to repeat my self, and to reiterate you ... Numbers/specs on paper

The X10 is BOTH a 6MP and 12MP camera. The 12MP sensor can produce either 12MP images in high resolution mode, under-expose half its pixels to provide 6MP images with greater dynamic range, or combine neighboring pixels for a 6MP high sensitivity mode. This sounds exactly like pixel binning, where a 1×2, 2×2, 4×4 or 8×8 group of photosites on the sensor is combined to produce high-sensitivity and low noise at the cost of proportional resolution.

As increasing yields on very high resolution sensors lowers the price to something reasonable, pixel binning could produce cameras like the X10 on a pro-level, offering the shooter options of high-resolution, low noise and high ISO and levels in between, in the same camera.

Let us say the D5 has a 48MP sensor. If extreme detail in studio or bright landscape work is desired, go high-res at the full 48MP. If available darkness at the highest possible quality is wanted, go 12MP or even 6MP. Setting 24MP would provide substantial resolution with a bit more sensitivity than at 48MP—a good every-day compromise.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Do you have hands on experience of this sort of system actually working?
I can see an increase in DR in low light situations/higher iso ...
But surely (and again this is me typing with little real knowledge) ... Ok bare with me here ...
My understanding is - larger "pixels" have a large photosite(?) and larger micro lens(?) because they are larger they can gather more light, more light gathered means in lower light less gain(?) has to be applied to get a response ... Because less gain is applied there is less noise.
All sensors have a base iso. From that base iso the best results are obtained ... Increase in iso = increase in gain(?). Bigger photosites over a whole sensor means less gain is needed so less noise
Is that all vaguly right, if probably a little simplistic, so far?

If you combine 2 photosites and 2 microlenses it doesn't make sence to me that this would have the same effect as having 1 large one ... Surly you are just doubling a lower response ie, if you add grey to grey you get grey, not White ... Or increase the gain and add grainy White to grainy White and get grainy White

I'm very eager to be corrected on the above...
I know we are trespassing dangerously into te realms of "gear head" talk here ... But I'm just trying to future understand the motivations of the industry when really all I want is a lower res better camera!

 

[Larry Bolch]

Nope—not in that income bracket. I have not kept up with it for that reason. Phase One seems to be the pioneer with its Sensor Plus—not exactly in the consumer/enthusiast price bracket—IIRC, in the $40,000US range. When it came on the market, Luminous Landscape reviewed it.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sensor-plus.shtml

A bit of googling on pixel binning will uncover a good bit of the underlying theory should you be brave enough to devote a few days to wade through it.

As I understand it, pixel density per square millimeter is a fairly good predictor of high-ISO performance. The D3/D700 is still one of the best with a 1.4 MP/cm² pixel density while the D300 has only a 3.3 MP/cm² pixel density. The D3x is 2.8 MP/cm² pixel density, and no great wonder in low light. Compact super-zooms range between 40-50 MP/cm² pixel density, requiring full-time noise reduction, even at low ISO settings in some cases. It may be simplistic and I am sure there is a lot of advanced physics that I don't care to learn, but by binning four pixels into one, you greatly improve the MP/cm² pixel density. This may be an over simplification—and then, it may not.

Since Phase One is actually selling equipment where this works, I see no reason to doubt it. As long as Gordon Moore's Law more or less keeps tracking, it should be possible within the next generation or two of 35mm-sized high-end cameras, and an eventual trickle down to lesser cameras.

Cameras are very good now. My first cameras were fascinating as I watched Nikon learning how to make digital cameras. On paper, the D200 did not seem all that different than the D300 and I almost skipped it. In the field, there was a vast difference—primarily in maturity. The D200 felt like a work in progress and the D300 was a finished, mature camera. The D700 took the fine guts of the D300 and added the superb sensor of the D3. I have given it considerable thought, but I can not think of any improvement that Nikon could make to flash the plastic for a D800 when it eventually arrives. Like film cameras, I could see myself using both the X100 and D700 for many years with full satisfaction. I know that there are a whole lot of others thinking the same way.

Adding video, a 20MP sensor and a "New and Improved" sticker just won't do it. A variable resolution/pixel binning camera might get my attention. A perfectly clean image at 6MP shot hand-held in moonlight would open some fascinating possibilities in a camera that can also produce large-format quality at ISO800.

 

[Oliver Lee-Haswell]

Information from fuji : x10 should arrive mid-October ish.... we have 4 on order (1 sold) along with cases and lens hoods, pricing is going to be around £500 - £550 as soon as we have one i will play and test and post my findings, i do have high hopes for this camera as it looks like it will rock the high-end compact camera market (P7100/G12/D-lux-5/etc...) No information of whether or not they will do the same sort of platinum service they do with the x100, but heres hoping.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Information from fuji : x10 should arrive mid-October ish.... we have 4 on order (1 sold) along with cases and lens hoods, pricing is going to be around £500 - £550 as soon as we have one i will play and test and post my findings, i do have high hopes for this camera as it looks like it will rock the high-end compact camera market (P7100/G12/D-lux-5/etc...) No information of whether or not they will do the same sort of platinum service they do with the x100, but heres hoping.

whats that then?

a hands on preview of the x10 when it comes in would be very nice!

 

[Paul Lange]

Weird isn't it? Fuji lost it in the DSLR race because they couldn't innovate as well as the competition but then all of a sudden come out with ground breaking (in marketing terms) cameras that people lust over. The HS10 bridge camera is apparently quite impressive as well. I've seen a few things on the web where a few protoggers have been very happy with it and use it for daily use where they don't want to lug their large expensive DSLRs around. I think part of it is that the X100 and probably the X10 look quality that is on par with the M9 while other cameras look interesting but don't stand out.

Going back to the MP issue, I took some shots with my wife's Sony 7MP compact that came out rather good. With modern software and printers the printer that I used blew the images up to around 40cm with no issues at all. I can't see most people using compacts wanting to go larger than that.