The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with the Fuji X10

A

Allan Ostling

Guest
I am starting this thread now, hoping to bury the earlier thread with the inappropriate title.

There are no reviews of the camera yet, and only a handful of image samples, but as an X100 owner I'm optimistic that Fujifilm has another winner with the X10. I think mine is one of the first pre-orders accepted at Amazon for 7 November shipping.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

raist3d

Well-known member
Re: Fuji X10

I am starting this thread now, hoping to bury the earlier thread with the inappropriate title.

There are no reviews of the camera yet, and only a handful of image samples, but as an X100 owner I'm optimistic that Fujifilm has another winner with the X10. I think mine is one of the first pre-orders accepted at Amazon for 7 November shipping.
I can just change the title of the other thread. Why start another.

Update: looks like I can't change it. thought I could. But honestly I don't see the big deal.


- Raist
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Re: Fuji X10

Update: looks like I can't change it. thought I could. But honestly I don't see the big deal.

- Raist
It is merely a minor irritation to me, certainly not a big deal.

Cannot the thread title be changed by the forum administrator?
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Re: Fuji X10

So far none of the sample images have shown what the X10's EXR processor can do in S/N mode, with half the pixels paired to neighboring pixels to give a 6 megapixel image of reduced noise. I'm eager to explore the potential of this.
 

woodmancy

Subscriber Member
Re: Fuji X10

The comments after the new DPreview preview of the X10 http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx10/ contain a discussion of the availability of the EXR modes. Is extended dynamic range available during RAW-only shooting? On this question the Manual is confusing.
The preview says

"The SN and DR modes are only available when shooting JPEGs, so those too will depend of how well Fujifilm turns a clever idea into good images"

I have this camera on order and I am a titch disappointed with this. However we'll have to wait and see.

Keith
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Re: Fuji X10

The preview says
"The SN and DR modes are only available when shooting JPEGs, so those too will depend of how well Fujifilm turns a clever idea into good images"
Yes, but is this statement in the preview correct, or in error? That is what the comments are discussing.

The folks at DPreview are clueless on many points of photography. For example, they say that the fast lens on the X10 will allow shallower depth of field than with a DSLR using a typical kit lens.
 

woodmancy

Subscriber Member
Re: Fuji X10

Yes, but is this statement in the preview correct, or in error? That is what the comments are discussing.

The folks at DPreview are clueless on many points of photography. For example, they say that the fast lens on the X10 will allow shallower depth of field than with a DSLR using a typical kit lens.
Yes, I see that now - still a chance raw will have it. I see someone has theirs in the UK. I'm in Canada - does anyone know when it arrives here?

The comments from people who have experienced the OVF are very encouraging.

Keith
 

Terry

New member
Re: Fuji X10

The folks at DPreview are clueless on many points of photography. For example, they say that the fast lens on the X10 will allow shallower depth of field than with a DSLR using a typical kit lens.
I actually don't think you are reading their comment the way they intended.

The lens is f2.0 with a 2/3" sensor. That is 1.5 stops faster than the kit lens for m4/3 at the wide end and and at least two stops faster at the long end (at most f2.8 for the X10 and f5.6 for the kit lens - the X10 is longer so you may only be at f2.5 at the focal where the m4/3 kit lens ends).

I believe that what they are saying is that the wider aperture makes up for the smaller sensor size in terms of its DOF vs. DSLR with a slow lens. My numbers below on the wide end don't show this to be correct but I don't have time to look it all up and right now....but here is one comparison

X10 at wide angle (7.1mm) f2.0 5 ft focus distance

near limit 3.38ft
far limit 9.64ft
total 6.27 ft


GH2 at wide angle 14mm f3.5 - 5 ft focus distance

3.54 ft
8.5 ft
4.96 ft


X10 at longer focal (estimated 22mm f2.5 - (f2.8 is at 28mm is longer than m/43 the kit lens goes)) 5 ft focus distance
4.68
5.37
.69

GH-2 (42mm f5.6)
4.67 ft
5.38 ft
.72 ft
 

jonoslack

Active member
Re: Fuji X10

Excellent Terry . . . sounds like the famous english expression:

2/10ths of sweet f*** all.

except that the sensor is half the size, so I guess it must be 1/10th of SFA.:)


Actually I need to do some hat eating here - I've been advocating 'in between' sized sensors for ages, and Nikon with the V1 and this Fuji seem to have proved me pretty wrong; they don't represent a perfect size/performance ratio . . . . . but it does seem that maybe 4/3 actually does.
 

Terry

New member
Re: Fuji X10

Actually there is some clarification from Andy Westlake at DPReivew when they got called out on the statements. The reply isn't 100% apples to apples because the P&S's have a longer lens than the kit lens and they are basically saying if you were limited to the one lens for each you can do more with the P&S than the kit lens with the dslr. The link provided is also pretty useful.

"Interesting analysis, but somewhat incorrect. It doesn't matter that the X10's lens is notionally equivalent to 57/5.6 on Four Thirds, or 75/8 on APS-C, because we're comparing to the kit lenses you actually get with those cameras, i.e. 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 or 14-42mm F3.5-5.6. There's no point in comparing with nonexistent lenses. And the X10 can indeed give better subject isolation than these typical kit zooms.

Compared to the ZX-1, things are really close. Both cameras have 112mm-equivalent lenses at the long end, but the X10's lens has a slightly larger physical aperture. This in turn means it will give fractionally more background blur."

A second response-

"This surprises a lot of people, but these small sensor cameras with fast lenses can indeed match SLRs with typical 18-55mm kit zooms. We demonstrated this in our review of the Olympus XZ-1:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/page8.asp
(scroll down to 'Depth of field and background blur').

Here you can see that the XZ-1 does a bit better than an 18-55mm on APS-C or a 14-42mm on Micro Four Thirds. Technically, this is because it has a similar sized physical aperture, and a slightly 'longer' lens (in terms of 35mm-equivalent focal length)."
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Re: Fuji X10

For moderate subject distances, the total depth of field (near to far) is proportional to fnR**2 where

f=focal length
n=aperture
R=reduction (= 1/magnification)​

For a subject of a given size (say a head and shoulders portrait) the reduction R is proportional to 1/L where

L = sensor dimension​

Since we are only interested in a ratio, we can take any consistent sensor dimension in the comparison – diagonal, horizontal side, or vertical side. Choose 11 mm diagonal for 2/3" sensor, 22 mm diagonal for 4/3" sensor.

Comparing the total depth between the X10 and a M4/3 camera shows it is a wash, using f2.8 for the X10, and f5.6 for a kit lens on an Olympus Pen E-P2, say, using the ratio of crop factors for the ration of focal lengths.

Terry's calculations essentially agree with this.
 

Terry

New member
Re: Fuji X10

Then the point that DPReview made was your kit lens stops at approx 85mm and the X10 gets you to 112mm which is a bit more flexible and allows you to then get a slightly shallower DOF (at a different angle of view) and then beat the dslr where you would be forced to buy another lens.
 

retow

Member
Re: Fuji X10

For moderate subject distances, the total depth of field (near to far) is proportional to fnR**2 where

f=focal length
n=aperture
R=reduction (= 1/magnification)​

For a subject of a given size (say a head and shoulders portrait) the reduction R is proportional to 1/L where

L = sensor dimension​

Since we are only interested in a ratio, we can take any consistent sensor dimension in the comparison – diagonal, horizontal side, or vertical side. Choose 11 mm diagonal for 2/3" sensor, 22 mm diagonal for 4/3" sensor.

Comparing the total depth between the X10 and a M4/3 camera shows it is a wash, using f2.8 for the X10, and f5.6 for a kit lens on an Olympus Pen E-P2, say, using the ratio of crop factors for the ration of focal lengths.

Terry's calculations essentially agree with this.
An XZ-1 is still around f2.2 or so at the 82mm equivalent focal length and the X10 maybe around f2.4, where the mft is at f5.6. So maybe "the folks over there" are not completely incompetent after all?:rolleyes:
 

woodmancy

Subscriber Member
Re: Fuji X10

Mustn't forget Einstein's theory of relativity, which implies that depth of field is also time related.
This means that if you are crossing the international date line on a cruise, the depth of field may change (increase or decrease, depending on which way you are going) by the cube root of the square of the hypotenuse of the right angled triangle formed by the focal length and the fourier transform of the aperture divided by pi. Personally I ignore the correction, because it is often insignificant (but I have noticed that many of my international date line pics are often a bit smudgy)

:deadhorse:

Keith
 

Lars

Active member
Re: Fuji X10

Yes, but is this statement in the preview correct, or in error? That is what the comments are discussing.

The folks at DPreview are clueless on many points of photography. For example, they say that the fast lens on the X10 will allow shallower depth of field than with a DSLR using a typical kit lens.
Another way to see DOF comparisons is that for a given angle of view, the actual diameter of the aperture determines the perceived DOF.

Example: A hypothetical kit lens on a DX sensor at approx normal 35 mm f/4 has 35/4 = 8.75 mm aperture. X10 is presumably about 12.7 mm focal length at normal, so 8.75 mm aperture would be about f/1.45. Clearly the X10 lens doesnt have as wide maximum aperture, so it is not a match for a kit lens in that respect.
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Re: Fuji X10

Then the point that DPReview made was your kit lens stops at approx 85mm and the X10 gets you to 112mm which is a bit more flexible and allows you to then get a slightly shallower DOF (at a different angle of view) and then beat the dslr where you would be forced to buy another lens.
What it all boils down to, in comparing the apertures at which two camera/lens systems have the same total depth of field, is simply the ratio of crop factors for the sensors. The comparison must only be between lenses set at the same (35mm equiv) focal length.

The ratio of the crop factors for the X10 and an APS-C sensor is (4/1.5), so the X10 at f2.8 will have the same depth of field as a Nikon DSLR at f7.5.

f = (2.8)(4/1.5) = 7.5​

The kit lens for a DSLR will have an aperture larger than this, typically f5.6 at say 112mm. So the depth of field can be narrower (although not by much) for the larger format camera.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Re: Fuji X10

Mustn't forget Einstein's theory of relativity, which implies that depth of field is also time related.
This means that if you are crossing the international date line on a cruise, the depth of field may change (increase or decrease, depending on which way you are going) by the cube root of the square of the hypotenuse of the right angled triangle formed by the focal length and the fourier transform of the aperture divided by pi. Personally I ignore the correction, because it is often insignificant (but I have noticed that many of my international date line pics are often a bit smudgy)

:deadhorse:

Keith
:ROTFL::ROTFL::poke::loco::watch::thumbs:
Splendid, and exactly how I feel about all of this.
I'm sure the Fuji X10 is excellent, and that it's better than the Xz-1 in some circumstances, and not in others :sleep006::sleep006:
 
Top