Why the Fuji X100 is a landmark camera, Part I
There are a lot of reasons why the Fuji X100 is an amazing camera. It's also a troubled camera, let down by a bad UI, bad implementation of some "features", and one or two physical problems with the build, but since I've already detailed these things in my first review posted for the X100, it's time to forget all that and talk about what makes this camera so amazing. I'm going to be doing this in multiple parts, because most of the great things about this camera deserve their own article. Today, I'm going to focus on the absolute best thing about the Fuji X100.
Image Quality
Image quality, for me at least isn't about megapixels, resolution calculated by lines of resolving power, or even the amount of headspace in highlights saved in a RAW file. Image quality is purely about how the image, straight out of the camera, looks on paper and on screen in how colour is dealt with, how sharp the details you want to be sharp are, how soft and blurred the out of focus elements are, and probably most importantly, how the noise levels in a photograph are. Noise = visual junk, especially when you're dealing with a lot of modifications and post processing.
I remember why I went Canon in the first place back in 2003; it was the distinct lack of colour noise in whatever noise the Digital Rebel's 6mp CMOS sensor had (it had noise, but it was more of a monochromatic noise isolated to the range of colours in the noisy areas). Frankly, Canon blew away everyone in the business at the time, from Nikon to Ricoh on the Digital Rebel's ability to capture an image into bits and bytes. They showed that CMOS chips were the way to go over CCD captures. It certainly changed my perceptions of what digital photography could be, and made me change from Nikon to Canon. For about a year or two, Nikon couldn't touch Canon's IQ.
I also fell in love with what I perceived as the Canon's creamy consistencies in colour: if you were shooting something that had elements of one major colour (a wall, for example), pixel peeping showed the resulting file as having mostly that one colour, with subtle, easy going variants on that same colour as the scene went darker or lighter.
In 2011, my two primary work tools have massive resolving power: the 22mp Canon 5D MkII, and the 18mp Canon t2i. The 5D's sensor is a full frame sensor, the t2i is a APS-C sensor with a 1:1.6 crop. But they are both what I'd consider excessively noisy (on the bad, colour noise level) above ISO800; in fact, the t2i has bits of excessive colour noise in shadows at ISO400 that I don't find very pleasing.
The Fuji X100 by contrast has the same sensor size as the Canon t2i (within a few mm at least), resolves only 12mp worth of pixels, but has amazing noise control right up to ISO 1600, 2000 even, and is definitely usable with low chroma noise at ISO3200. Even at ISO6400, the noise levels look like an ISO1600 image from my t2i. That's 2 full stops of resolution difference, just talking about noise. The Fuji X100 does produce noise. At all ISO levels, even the native lowest, ISO200. But it is a very monochromatic noise (meaning the noise pixels seem to be just subtle shade differences of the same colour, instead of showing 50 different colours within a small pixel range to simulate one colour, which is known as chroma noise). The noise on the X100 is very much like the grain on my favourite slide and film from the past: Kodachrome 64 or Illford X100. We're talking a very fine, fine art calibre grain.
Combined - the lack of noise, and the quality of the noise are two factors that make the X100 a complete winner in the IQ category. There's a third one: the silky smooth transitions of colours that make for continuous tone, smooth transitions from one colour to another in scene. I dug up some old Digital Rebel photos to compare. Have a look (and click thru and view the largest image sizes on Flickr to really see what's going on).
Here's a 200% crop.
What's important and fair to note here are a few things. First, I never shot the Digital Rebel in RAW format (didn't know any better) so every photo I have from it is processed with its jpeg engine and there was built in noise reduction. Second, the sample fuji photo I chose was a ISO400 one, which has more noise than ISO200. Third, the Fuji sample is a RAW file that had no post-processing noise reduction, and only the standard sharpening (though Lightroom and Fuji both do some minimal, native noise reduction in camera / on import). Basically, you'd think a 6mp sensor with jpeg noise reduction built in would result in a less noisy picture than a 12mp sensor's RAW output with no real noise reduction, right? Especially at 2 stops difference (ISO100 vs ISO400).
If anything, the Fuji sample, at more than 4x the resolving power (12mp vs 6mp, similar sensor sizes), shows less harsh noise and less chroma noise than even the silky-smooth Digital Rebel's output. Remember, that's 4 times less light hitting each pixel on the Fuji sensor!
This impresses me because ever since the Digital Rebel, I've had to trade resolving power for noise in photographs (especially chroma noise); every "upgrade" I've done since the Rebel & 20D (40D, 5D, Xsi, Xti, t1i, t2i, and especially the 5D MkII) has had more noise issues, especially in shadows, than the original Digital Rebel or the 20D had (well maybe the original 5D was also silk like butter smooth).
The Fuji X100 is the first camera I've purchased in a long, long time that not only makes colour transitions continuous, but has exceptional noise control abilities. There is noise, but it is like a true fine film grain. I love it.
This alone makes the camera a worthy purchase.
Chroma / Fringe Issues
Another element of IQ that the Fuji X100 excels in are those two areas - colour fringe issues and chromatic aberrations. Pairing a matched lens to a matched sensor (the way the Fuji formula worked) helps this a ton, but the quality of the lens glass plays a big role too. Chroma issues and purple fringing are nearly non-existent in all but the most challenging shots (like for example branches of a tree against a bright sky). In those challenging shots, the fringe problems are definitely under control.
In this regard, not only does the Fuji have a major leg up on most of my Canon setups, but also beats the pants off the Digital Rebel, which had some major purple fringing problems in its day. Here are two examples - the TDI Badge is from the Digital Rebel using a 35mm lens (f2) and shows big purple fringing - fat, thick, noticeable. The Fuji sample is even more harsh a transition and is one of the few examples of fringing issues I could even find in my photos so far - and barely there (green/aqua fringing on bayonet). Both shots are 100% crops. Visit the Flickr page and view the full size photos to see all the detail.
JPEG Engine
Lastly, I cannot even begin to speak about the amazing jpeg engine Fuji has built for this camera -- to do so would add 5,000 words to this article. Suffice to say, I (and many pro camera reviewers) declared this engine to be the best one found on a camera today. It is so good that sworn RAW shooters are switching to jpg shots because the camera does as good, if not a better job than most post processors can do in Lightroom or Photoshop. It's a brilliant, brilliant software engineering feat on Fuji's part.
Let me just give two examples why the jpeg engine is so good, then I'l shut up. First, while I mentioned the camera has the rare problem with chromatic aberrations and purple fringing, that happens in RAW; in processed jpg images from the camera, fringing and chroma problems are gone - dealt with. You can see it in shooting RAW + jpg mode. The camera just deals with it, and you loose basically no resolving power when it does so.
Second, the camera does an absolutely stellar job turning an already grain-like noise (at higher ISOs) into something I cannot distinguish from my old photographic prints from my film days of ISO400, ISO800, pushed ISO1600 shots. Looking at those prints with a loope and comparing them to what I see on screen, the Fuji's jpeg engine renders flawless fine grain - and the grain on a ISO3200 photo looks like an ISO400-800 photo print grain. Fuji's 6400 looks like my pushed 1600 photos. I love it. No other camera comes close to this.
Here's a few examples, uploaded directly from the camera to Flickr via an Eye-Fi card (no post processing done in Lightroom etc). The first image in particular tells the tale regarding chroma and fringing or the lack thereof - there's a uber-strong contrast in the blurred container near centre frame. If shot with my Canons and a lesser lens, that area would have massive purple showing up on the contrast transition; here with the Fuji, there's none. Whatever fringe did exist was eliminated by the jpeg engine.
Long story short, the Fuji X100's Image Quality is nearly untouchable by any other sub $2,000 (maybe even sub $3,000 or more) camera on the market today. I certainly haven't shot with one that is better.
The X100 may not rival my 5D Mk II for resolving power, for "zoom in ability" on capturing detail in its massive 22mp photographs, or for the beautiful bokeh the 5D (paired with a killer lens) can do, but it absolutely kicks the 5D's butt to the corner on noise, chroma, colour transitions and even in chromatic aberrations and colour fringe issues
The X100 is no slouch in the bokeh department either. A great iris design in the aperture blades combined with a decently large shutter and the f2 lens make it a champ in this regard, and definitely as good as my t2i with a 35L or 50L on it.
Image Quality. The number one reason why I think the Fuji X100 is a landmark camera.
