PC heads out to buy an HDTV, comes back with a camera

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by bakerman

I've struck out at two Costcos so far trying to find this camera. I guess i'll have to visit a regular camera shop in order to check it out. Well at least this way I can compare the X10 to the X100.

Hmmm...interesting.

I've seen it online at various vendors for $549. But a comparison with an X100 would still be a good idea.

[TommyC]

Originally Posted by bakerman

I've struck out at two Costcos so far trying to find this camera. I guess i'll have to visit a regular camera shop in order to check it out. Well at least this way I can compare the X10 to the X100.

These 2 are entirely different cameras.

The X100 has an APS-C sensor with hybrid view finder and no zoom. The X100 has a 2/3" sensor with a very basic optical view finder (ie. no info display) and zoom.

Picture quality wise, the X100 is vastly superior if you only need 35mm.

[AudioNut]

Originally Posted by TommyC

These 2 are entirely different cameras.

Picture quality wise, the X100 is vastly superior if you only need 35mm.

Having seen some of Stephen's photographs here on AA, taken with his professional grade equipment, and then seeing photos taken by his little X-10, and hearing his praise of the X-10, I find it hard to believe that the X-100 produces results that are "vastly superior" to those taken by the X-10.

What do you say about the "vastly superior" Stephen? Could it be so?

[AudioNut]

BTW - I just looked, and Amazon has the X-10 for $549, and with Prime you can have it with free shipping on Tuesday - and for just $8.95 you can have it tomorrow! (Saturday)

I may just plunk down the extra $8.95 and enjoy the thing over the weekend!

[bakerman]

Originally Posted by TommyC

These 2 are entirely different cameras.

The X100 has an APS-C sensor with hybrid view finder and no zoom. The X100 has a 2/3" sensor with a very basic optical view finder (ie. no info display) and zoom.

Picture quality wise, the X100 is vastly superior if you only need 35mm.

I had my eye on the X100, but after seeing PC's photos with his X10, i'll have to check them out side by side.

[TommyC]

Originally Posted by AudioNut

Having seen some of Stephen's photographs here on AA, taken with his professional grade equipment, and then seeing photos taken by his little X-10, and hearing his praise of the X-10, I find it hard to believe that the X-100 produces results that are "vastly superior" to those taken by the X-10.

What do you say about the "vastly superior" Stephen? Could it be so?

Trust me, I'm not saying the X10 is a poor camera. In fact, it is amazing for the sensor size. It will be my first choice for a P&S camera right now.

But, the X100 is just that much better. Have you seen its ISO 6400 shots? They look like ISO 800 on the X10, but with much more detail and colour depth.

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by AudioNut

Having seen some of Stephen's photographs here on AA, taken with his professional grade equipment, and then seeing photos taken by his little X-10, and hearing his praise of the X-10, I find it hard to believe that the X-100 produces results that are "vastly superior" to those taken by the X-10.

What do you say about the "vastly superior" Stephen? Could it be so?

Julian,
I'll stay away from the "vastly superior" characterization because "vastly" is a relative term. But TommyC is correct that the X100, with it's APS-C sized sensor, is going to produce, on an absolute level, superior image quality to the X10 with it's 2/3" sensor. It's just simple physics and poisson statistics, not to put too fine a point on it. My Canon 1D pro body is going to produce image quality superior the X100 for the same reason, it has a larger sensor than the X100 (a 1.3X crop factor instead of the 1.5X on the X100).

With any product, there are tradeoffs that will be made at a given price point. I agree with Tommy that the X10 has amazing image quality for it's sensor size, but I don't expect it will compete with the X100 for image quality in any absolute, pixel-peeping, sense.

But the key point for any buyer of either camera is whether it will meet your needs and whether it represents a value proposition.

For me, the X10 is superior to my little Fuji F31fd point and shoot (which is still a terrific little camera) and definitely superior to my 12 megapixel Canon G9, and I'm looking to the X10 to serve as an "intermediate body" to fill a gap between my little F31fd and my pro Canon 1D body. I will be selling the G9, a camera I never really liked in real world use and as a result, never used. It was just too noisy with it's 1/7" sensor and too high a pixel count for the sensor size.

Comparing and contrasting the two Fuji X-cameras, I also wanted more focal length range than the fixed focal lens on the X100, so in that respect, the X10 was more compelling. I'm willing to give up sensor size and viewfinder functionality to have a range of focal lengths to shoot with. At $549, it is also about 1/2 the cost of the X100 at $1199 or thereabouts. I could have gone whole hog and gotten the X-1 Pro which has an APS-C sized sensor and supports interchangeable lenses, but it's $1600 and I'm not sure I don't want a camera as an "intermediate body" that is that large and bulky.

So, for me, the X10 is my go-to choice for a "constant carry" camera. For some folks, it will be X100. For other folks, that might be a Lieca M9. It all depends on what your respective needs are and how you made your choices based on those needs.

I will say that if Fuji made an X10 with an APS-C sized sensor and the X100's awesome hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder with a telescoping compact lens with the focal length range of the X10, that would be my ideal choice. But right now, that camera doesn't exist.

The bottom line is that all the new X-series of Fuji cameras are hot little numbers, and fantastic cameras for what each of them are. They all have absolutely superb build quality, gorgeous retro looks, innovative features, and each camera has excellent image quality within it's respective sensor class. Would I love to have an black, Special Edition X100 like my co-worker Hugh does. You bet! I'd love to have the X-1 Pro or even the new X-E1 just announced this week. But for right now, I am thoroughly enjoying my little X10.

[chessman]

Stephen, what is your take on Panasonic Lumix as a point and shoot?

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by chessman

Stephen, what is your take on Panasonic Lumix as a point and shoot?

Randy,
They're great cameras. I have a buddy who has the GF-1 and I like it a lot. They'll take a range of Micro Four Thirds lenses. I don't much about the models after the GF-1, but I do know the GF-1 is still available from various vendors even though it's been discontinued. DPReviews has good reviews on them.

For me though, they still feel like "digicams"...all of 'em do, except for the new Fujis and the Olympus PENs

[chessman]

Stephen, like you I am looking for an intermediate easy carry. I had thought about a digital SLR with some real glass, but breath taking prices and WEIGHT caused me to balk. My kids have one Lumix or another and get surprisingly good shots, but the point seems to be that they take shots because they have the camera on them. I am thinking the Fuji X10 may really be that "intermediate" that combines P&S easy carry with some "prosumer" kicks. Thanks for the feedback.