X-Transformed? Fujifilm X30 Review

Mike FL,
I looked at the page you listed and if you look at any of the corners of the target, the Samsung does not seem to be performing as well as the other cameras. In particular, look at the watch. This is not unexpected in such a fast lens. Every camera is a compromise. I happen to like the combination on compromises that make up the X30, you clearly do not. Each to his own.

But do they have a "LOCK" on the "LOCK"? Looks like it.

In my POW Fuji have sharp enough lenss but true dimensions could be better but i didnt see any lack of sharpness against his counterparts in this segment. Im rating the g7x lens design as best out there but .... G7X hadnt OVF manual zoom RFstyle body Phase focus etc.... not only one thing is winning the game for camera .. its beter to look at more balanced option for your needs than just specs of which cam could theoreticaly take best picture

Thanks for your comment, Naveed. You can see my latest book, "Searching for Edward Hopper," at:

rpkphoto.smugmug.com/Books/Searching-for-Edward-Hopper.

I hope you enjoy it.

Naveed, I like your photographs, very dramatic, particularly those of the Middle East. You could be a photojournalist instead of a software engineer.

You might like the photos I took in the Sultanate of Oman in 2008. They are in in the folder "Travel" at: rpkphoto.smugmug.com.

Visiting there was a transformative experience.

Many of the respondents here take this comments section to 'let it all hang out.' and have a little fun. This may be unfair to the Noob!
Anyone wanting a serious opinion of the camera being discussed should just read the review. And I must congratulate the author of the review for a job well done!

Rodger,

Some real excellent work in your book. I really enjoyed the resonance you achieved with some of the very distinctive visual motifs employed by Hopper - not a simple aping of a surface aesthetic, rather it seems a visual language formed through a considerate synthesis of concerns.

It appears you don't need a new camera.

Rodger

I guess it is less the notion that the X30 is not capable of anything good but far more the hard fact that the market offers a number of cameras at similar price-ranges that run ahead of the X30, especially in terms of Sensor Technology.
And whilst I often don't care about pixel peeping, once you start to shoot low light scenarios the X10-X30 these days are no longer what can easily be expected....
My main "issue" is that when the X10 came to the market, even the X20 - they offered a lot of things that no competitor offered in a similarly compact package. Sure there were cameras (larger) out there which offered better IQ - etc... but the X10 was one of the best handling compact cameras with an excellent build.
But you can turn and twist it like you want - the X30 is certainly still "capable" - but the competition offers cameras that will give you all that the X30 does and then some more.

A good photographer can get great results from a mediocre system. No huge surprise there.

That's great that you like how it fits in your hand, but the specs are just not all that exciting to me. Doesn't make it a cruddy camera... just an uninspiring one. Most people could make a better choice and get a bit better results.

But its not like an RX100 Mk3 is 10 times better or anything. The delta between Worst camera and Best camera (in the enthusiast compact zoom 800 dollar ish range), is not all THAT big.

captura .. completely disagreed .. noobs or trolls get what they deserves .. there is no excuse to lack of knowledge or respect for other's opinions.

Roger's comments and mine were related to his personal experience with this camera. I found it very useful, much more than seeing photo gallery posted by DpR sometimes. If it wasn't for you, you may ignore it. Trust me all comments here are optional, no harm will be done to you if you won't read some..

We have a failure to communicate. You don't understand my meaning and the resulting reply from you is gibberish to my ears. A "noob" or "newbie" is not a disaffected person, but a new member who is not likely to understand the intricacies of these forums. Unlike yourself, I can place no fault on their being 'new' and I believe they should be treated with dignity and patience. Then they will learn, soon enough.

Hardly a troll, read MY comments and see that I own a Fuji X-10. Where does your illogical, extreme reaction and anger come from, I wonder?

@Rodger
It's not just commenters here who are showing little enthusiasm for this camera. DPR didn't even give it a Silver award, so they don't even rate it against the competition.

That's not to say it's a bad camera and you can't take great photos with it - just that there are far more compelling options around in the current market.

But you already knew all that when you made your sarcastic comment.

You're a photographer Rodger. Most people who complain here aren't. They're just a bunch of unappeasable spec sheet geeks.

Rodger your review has been most useful to me, the x30 has just moved to the top of my list. Your work is fantastic and I commend you on your approach to a subject matter that is so outside the box. I was told once do your own thing and flourish, keep up the great work.

Are you trying to pick a fight with me captura? It's perfectly clear why I wrote as I did; I was making a point, which everybody (including you) fully understood.

Now, two weeks later, when the thread has pretty much run its course, here you are, getting snarky with me. Don't you have anything else to do?

Your commentary belies the full latitude of options that might be desired in a 'creative' process. And your analogies of other imaging technologies ignores the obviously more narrow imperatives of those contexts.

There is ample room for photographic method both reverent and irreverent with respect to historical photographic processes.

As a professor who forwards a great deal of consideration for contemporary contexts, both in theory and practice, I see no dissonance in promoting traditional exposure dynamics and other things, I imagine, you might feel antiquated.

I believe most understand that my usage of 'narrow' is not a qualitative reference; these other forms of imaging have very specific aims, narrower than the wide range of potential needs of the photography community, "artistes" and non-"artistes" alike.

Btw- Does it make you feel better to add the "e"? Is that a dog whistle that feels your heart with warm satisfaction? I don't walk the earth to defend art or artists. I spend most of my leisure time, decidedly removed from both. I am not going to argue the value of art versus other things with you. But, please do remind me to come to your place of work and add an "e" to whatever your title/occupation might be - just because I think that would be cute.

As for your final question, I'm just not interested in answering.

'Etymology' necessarily includes 'origin'. So (observing that I am being pedantic), they needn't be listed separately. And, yes, I am familiar with the etymology of 'artist(e)'. My point stands, given the context of your usage.

Putting aside a bit of irritation, I will ask you these questions (and I do so genuinely): how are 'retro' characteristics (speaking most specifically about physical controls) antithetical to the modern developments you desire? Is it just that discussion relating to the former occupies space in forums such as this? Can you imagine a circumstance wherein these things would not be oppositional?

Actually radiology and photography are not similar at all. Radiology is a job where the process is generally uninteresting to the practitioner. Photography is generally intimately tied to process for most photographers. I want to get paid for my work as simply as possible and the traditional dials and layout of film cameras do this with far greater efficiency than a multiplicity of buttons and menus. One does not need endless options, just a few easily accessed ones. Thus I CAN get my work done more quickly.

Radiology is not done outside on a sunny day. Touch screens which are barely visible in broad daylight and require small fingers to use the controls accurately and if over 50 ,reading glasses does not strike me as an advance . One also needs to consider,if old fashioned enough to use a viewfinder rather than the approximate waving of the camera 18" away from your face,that you cannot alter parameters without taking the camera away from your eye. Just because something is 50yrs old doesn't mean it is out of date. SLRs have plenty of buttons and dials , I don't see professionals ditching them.

If you were a professional photographer you would pay a lot of attention to process as it is intimately involved in the final result. Photography is often conducted in disparate environments that require quick, reliable adjustments. Radiology is comparable to studio photography in that the conditions are tightly controlled thus changes are minimal after initial setup.
Snarky comments about artistry don't make you look clever, they make you look like a troll.

One IS paid for the process as there is no image without process.
To the extent process needs to aid the production of the image the inclusion of controls to effect that is important.
Film processing is no longer a part of photography for the most part, however control of the camera with adjustments derived from film cameras that actually are effective is useful to the creation of the image.
Your question has been answered several times in this thread and your insistence that it hasn't does indicate trollish tendencies on your part.

You were tempted to abandon your lovely X10 for a fidgety expensive LX100? Tsk tsk! You have the dreaded disease called Wanderlust! The X10 is a much prettier camera.

Captura,
I have no such thing ;)

To me the camera is predominantly a tool to get a task done.
The X10 used to fit the bill perfectly well a couple of years ago.
The LX100 fits the "same" bill better these days.
At work I can use a Nikon D3 - which has its merits.
When do most of the shootings I do on a part time basis I mostly use my m4/3 gear - namely the OM-D E-M1 + Lenses.
But when I travel, I tend to pack on the minimal side of things (a 35Liter (approx. 2000cin) pack is all I take most of the time, whether it's one week or several month.
The LX100 is ideal for this - offering excellent image quality for it's size, a good range of focal length, a very bright lens and plenty of direct control (including that lovely aperture ring) to make most shooters happy who prefer not to dig through menus all the time.
As said, if Fuji would have abandoned the 2/3 sensor for either a 1" or larger - I'd happily upgraded to the X30.

Rallyfan,

I don't even think they should have lowered the price - if they opted for a larger sensor.

I guess doing so (adding a larger sensor) fuji would probably threaten it's own X-System sales a good bit too much....
But the sensor and its output just feels dated.

X30 has no advantage in Lens, Sensor/low_light, and Compactness comparing to others, such as LX100, RX100-3, G1X-2, G7X.

Lens:
X30's not very fast zoom is NOT wide enough by today's standard while others are 24mm,

Sensor:
Of course, the X30 is noticeably poor in low-light b/c dated smaller 2/3 sensor while others are at least 1".

Compactness:
X30 is not a small camera for what X30 can offer.

Buying a travel camera is based on common sense + compromise as you can see from "Amazon Best Sellers Rank", RX100-3 has been #1 among the cameras mentioned above.

Again, it is all about common sense, and X30 is compromised way too much.

I was referring to the very compact Nikon Coolpix 'A' with a DX/APSC sensor, the compact Ricoh with same, and the Fuji X100T, also APSC. They hugely outclass your list in image quality.

But they don't have a zoom lens. And that is what takes up a lot of room.
You really need to compare them with the Fuji X100T.
I don't own any of these cameras but really you've got to respect what Panasonic achieved in making their lens for a reasonably large sensor so small and yet so fast .

What's not to like?

Because we do. Can someone please explain to me why that's a problem?

Functionality and interface.

Because the cameras are not pink.

Because the alternative is a rounded hunk of plastic

Well, most people like the looks of nice vintage cars, some don't, it's ok to not.

Because we have good taste?

Because most modern designs look like a bar of soap and lack buttons.

I love the functionality of being able to quickly adjust major parameters. The aperture should just always (except on super simple or compact camera be on the lens, it's intuitive.

We could explain it to you, however we can't understand it for you.

HMeYe (17 hours ago)
"the X10 was a winner cos there was no competition ... I don't see y someone will get an X30 today instead of an LX100 for example ! except that is cheaper ..."

oh, and it has a far better EVF and a tilt screen, oh and the battery lasts way longer, oh and it has infinitely better out of camera jpegs oh yes, and the colors are way superior, oh nearly forgot... it has a manual zoom. oh, it also feels better in the hand...oh, and it has a proper exp compensation program even in manual mode.

Maybe you have to live longer. I bought an Olympus in 1970 buy just going into the shop; no DP then. I took it on holiday. While winding on the first roll, I had 3 great pictures of my feet. I loved this camera as every holiday picture was great. Not to mention the tiny Olympus that Chris Bonnington took to everest. Those were the days; little money but a lot of yearning. When we see new retro cameras that remind us of those days, our hearts start beating faster. The manufacturer's know this. Who cares; more please? I'm your No.1 sucker.

I miss the old DPR user reviews with star ratings given to cameras that were not even released yet.

four under:

The point is the "had it" has no method of verification at all--whether or not the camera was purchased at Amazon.

HowaboutRaw:

I understand that and agree fully with you. It's just that the OP explicitly mentioned Amazon as a potential reseller without any knowledge of where the 23 alleged "had it" came from.

I believe nerd2 is merely pointing out his/her issues with the camera as stated. These are legitimate concerns to some.

What's the use o 4k video now?

Don, because we have 4K tv's now.

I don't have a TV.

nerd2 is not just pointing out his/her concerns, s/he is asking WHY? Most photographers (in the true sense of the word) will tell you, the way a camera feels and operates is more important than its specs. Most photographers already have a camera or system that far exceeds the specs and IQ of the RX and LX series the OP is referring to. These same photographers don't mind the smaller sensor nor the size (which in fact is an advantage over the inferior smartphone-like handling of the RX100s) nor the steep? price which is about 2/3 or even 1/2 of the other two. As for the 4K video? most 'photographers' couldn't care less about the video and those who do wouldn't even read bother with any Fuji, period. Image quality isn't just about megapixels or high-ISO performance and even then none of it matters if your camera doesn't make you want to go out and shoot, the X30 does and that's why cgarrard asked whether he/she had shot with one, even if you don't buy it at least you'll understand 'why'.

B&H's SONY NEX7 with zoom is $498 which is $1 cheaper than X30.

$499 for a X30 is full price, or FOOL price for whom bought it.

Mike its only a fool price if someone thinks its a fool price. Price a 28-112mm f/2-2.8 lens for the NEX7 and get back to us here.

Tick tock.

Since 28-112mm is full frame equivalent, f stop will be f8-11.2
FF equivalent.

Why bring the NEX-7 into this? It's been discontinued for 3 years, and that's only leftover stock. It held it's price quite well for an old camera, don't you think?

ttran88, only for DOF. In terms of exposure, you're incorrect. Light passing through the aperture is f/2-2.8 equivalent. Exposure is exposure.

Considering the exceptional optical quality of this lens wide open, your also most likely to stop down any NEX zoom lens to get the same quality corner to corner- and even then you won't get it. Plus, you'll lose the DOF advantage.

@ cgarrad
pls read article in regards to equivalence http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care/2

FWIW: Per DPR's understand, this X30's "f stop will be f8-11.2FF equivalent" as ttran88 indicated.

Here is the DPR sample, and X30's lens is not only very SLOW but almost the *slowest* one in terms of LOW-LIGHT ability per DPR's chart below.

Other than VERY SLOW lens, X30's zoom is not wide enough in today's stand as seen in the chart below as well.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100/images/Equiv_Ap.png

Read the TEXT under the chats to see what's it means.

FWIW, DPR is being stupid when calling f/2 lens slow because of the sensor size. A motorcycle is not going any slower than a car when both are going 60 mph. :-)

It is a F2 to F2.8 lens. But by the same token it is NOT a 28mm to 112mm lens.
If you change the focal length to FF equivalent you also have to change the aperture to FF equivalent which is F8 to F11.2.
Without getting into an equivalence discussion think about what F2 actually means. It means the effective aperture is half the focal length.
If you change the focal length then you have to change the aperture otherwise you're suggesting the effective aperture is bigger than it actually is.

Remember, 2/3" is the same size as 1/1.5" sensors. So it's barely bigger than the G16 image sensor.

There is an x100Z
It is called an XE2 with a zoom. The whole premise of having the x100 series is the fixed len, and compact size. Fuji have a number of options for bodies with the same sensor and zoom lens options.

Not quite Paul. It's all about having a fixed lens, better grip, and hybrid optical finder. I know exactly what Rodger is saying- and I can't disagree.

I bet Rodger likes the Digilux 2 and LC1 too, both have the size Rodger is looking for, and fixed bright lens. Something along those lines in size...

Great shots Rodger. Thanks for sharing. That's what it's all about. Great project idea. I agree with the notion of a 100z.

There are phones (smartphones) that have larger sensors than the X30 and there are phones with smaller sensor like the Iphone6.. But IQ must be pretty similar so for those who already carry a phone all day long why carry the X30? Why not the RX100 series or the LX100 or the G7x? Any one of these are much better at image capturing and video recording than the X30.

So clearly this is a camera for those without a phone.

How are the zoom, optical viewfinder, direct controls and ergonomics on those phones? To be fair, there's a Samsung with a zoom, but its image quality is notoriously bad. The point is, it's ok if this is not for you, but there's a place for it depending on what priorities people have.

You stated that there is a place for it for those who do not have a phone, which is to say that you stated that there is no place for it.

Are you a very, very dim bulb or just trolling? Those are just the people who can, of course, afford a premium compact camera.

Phone with an evf, what are you talking about Mario? Don't tell me you're saying its as good as a smart phone with an evf... please dont let it be that.

Ah ok, so the post is in the wrong place :). Yes maybe I ought to reply to his post too. :)

I like adding bacon and a side of fries.

The X30 has abundant advantages over the E-PL7.
Such as: Faster autofocus (Phase detection vs Contrast detection) so it catches candid moments easily.
It has better image stabilization: Lens vs Oly Sensor shift
The X30 CMOS sensor not the livemos offered on E-PL7
CMOS sensors often produce better quality images.

The X30 Shoots faster 12 fps vs 8 fps
Also it has built-in flash, for those shots inside at a party or restaurant.
The battery is real good with about 30% Longer battery life
The X30 has a viewfinder.
The X30 fits in your pocket way better as its volume is quite a bit less.
With the E-PL7, y'our stuck with no zoom if you use the f/1.7

X30 is a bit cheaper too, with less sales tax to boot.

I think one of the main reasons that pairing isn't appealing to me is because although there are m43 fast pancakes around, they're not wide enough. If they had a 12mm f2.0 that was the same size that'd be a different story. The olympus 12mm f2.0 is a) $700 and b) 43mm long.

Still, the LX100 offers essentially that at the wide end with a zoom so I'm still not seeing a reason to have an ILC if you want compact.

Some people like a high-end zoom compact that provides the style and shooting experience of this camera.

The E-PL7 with the 20mm lens is a great combo, but it's just a combo with a fixed lens and without a viewfinder, so it 's a totally different proposal.

Tedolph- maybe if you used it your questions would be answered. Most of the time experience is a much more valuable teacher than forums.

tedolf/ TEdoph/ Tedolpf,
Why not just get a nice post-orb X10?
Then you will get more dynamic range, better JPEGS and video, too.