X100VI Image Quality

by Brianin Opinionon Posted on

Precondition: I’m looking to upgrade my FujiFilm X-T2 camera to something a bit more modern and flexible. I got caught up in the hype on the X100VI and was waiting for production supply to come up, where I’d pull the trigger and buy it…. Then I saw the sample shots taken from other users, and I became disappointed. For some reason I see little to no discussion on the soft focus (or missed focus) of X100V and X100VI cameras. This article seeks to point out the softness of the shots on the X100 lineup, by showcasing random images shot on these cameras.

Soft Focus

It is important to note that the FujiFilm X100* bodies are fixed lens cameras. As such, the lens needs to be of high caliber since you’re stuck with it for life. What I’ve noticed time and time again, are sample shots being shared online (in full resolution) where the shots have missed focus or are a bit soft. Often these shots look like they need a bit of tightening up, to get that focus accurate. So what the heck is going on and why is no one discussing this?

Dynamic Range Issues

Looking at random shots on the X100VI and X100V, I notice a lack of details (and a lot more noise) in shadows or low lit scenes. These aren’t just film simulation grain, it’s a seemingly quality loss in the lower range.

Methodology of Comparison

For this comparison I wanted to look at shots from a variety of photographers in higher resolution. To that end, I am using Flickr.com as they allow the full resolution image to be uploaded. In some cases the photographer has limited the size. Searching Flickr for the body types (X100VI, X100VI) and lenses (XF27mm, xf16mm) allows for a general feel for the quality produced across dozens of photographers. I’m not cherry picking only the bad shots. I’ve included a few examples where the focus was at an expected sharpness on an X100VI. Sadly, the overall majority of shots I see, feel off where the focus is on the wrong subject, details are lacking, earth tones are murky and not defined.

What to Look For

In the linked images below, zoom in and look for the plane of focus. Images in full resolution require multiple clicks to get to the highest resolution. When you zoom to in Flickr, it takes a few seconds to download the higher resolution image. After it loads, look where the focus is landing and then examine that area. Is it clear? Does it have imperfections? Are imperfections due to film simulation (grain), or is it missed focus/soft focus?

Do lines, architecture, and details pop out, or are they smoothed out?

Look at earth tones. Are they murky or clear?

Example Shots from the X100VI

  • https://flic.kr/p/2pzPtub (Focus is on girl, but details blown out. Far too soft. An XF27mm would show details on the fabric, as would a much cheaper GRIII.)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pzWcTF – Focus is sharp in the well lit areas. The shadows (even lighter shadows) lack detail you would get on a XF27mm or a different camera setup (GR III, Nikon Zf) – I think the X100VI might be relying on contrast sharpening, where there is less contrast, such as the yellow stripe on the cement in the shadows, it lacks detail, but the white text on the black board at the top is pretty sharp.
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pzWjY2 (Overexposed… not sure if it’s a photographer problem, or a desired look. it is sharp enough to read the text on the bottle clearly and this is at f/8 where the camera tends to sharpen up)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pCe9b6 (Low light/high ISO scene. Beard and skin is a mess. Poor Cell Phone like quality. No details or definition in hair. Looks like a cell phone pic – Again, little contrast here, so if the camera is using algorithmic contrast sharpening, it would fail.)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pAXrYF (zoom in on man. Focus is soft. zipper, stitching, just soft – again cell-phone like quality. Compare to shots with a Fuji XF 27mm lens and you’ll see the major difference in detail/quality).
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pAMbti (One of the few sharp ones)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pBKXES (Low Light scene, again focus is miserable)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pBKXDE (A low end cell phone would have done better. Awful focus, I think it landed on her necklace? Details totally missing. it is 3200 ISO, but many cameras today won’t get this grain until pushed into the crazy ISO ranges of 60k+)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pBoiuq (At F/7 most of the scene should be in focus, but the water lacks detail. Grass is in focus, but lacks definition. Colors tend to feel murky. Compare with GR III outdoor shots and see the difference.)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pCizK5 (F 6.4 – Shingles and bricks lack definition. Just a tad too soft – again, cell phone quality)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pzdDXT (F 7.1 – 500 ISO, not too high, but shadow details are lacking)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pDkma5 – Wide open, but sharp. Also well lit. This is what I expect (detail wise) for every shot. Sadly, few accomplish this. Either build/production quality issues are at play, or this is sharp due to the well lit scene.
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pzPB5M – Lackluster shot. Confident that a cell phone would produce a better image. At f/8, I’d expect most of what’s on the plate to be detailed. Where shadows land, details dissipate.

Example Shots from the X100V

Comparisons

In this section I’ll compare the image quality above with several other options, including Fuji and non-Fuji cameras.

Compare with FujiFilm XF27mm

Fuji has some amazing lenses. The XF 27mm prime (which comes in a kit for the X-E4) is considered one of the sharpest XF lenses in its price range. It’s certainly affordable (around $400) and is tack sharp, edge to edge. This is the quality I would expect of a fixed lens setup. After all, you can soften details, but you can’t really create detail where it’s lacking.

Compare with FujiFilm X-S20 with an XF 18-55mm

Looking at the X-S20 as a cheaper alternative, we do give up the classic Fuji camera appeal, for a more traditional SLR vibe. Going beyond that, however, we get a discounted camera with most of the bells and whistles of the X100VI (including 19 of the 20 film simulations available). In a kit, with the XF 18-55mm lens, it’s about the same price point as the X100VI. Below are some shots from this camera and lens combo:

  • https://flic.kr/p/2pxXcVC (Daylight landscape. Sharp and detailed grass… not oversharp).
  • https://flic.kr/p/2peKgCb (low light landscape. Colors are great. No artifacts)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pxfEGr (High contrast scene, beautifully rendered. Details in shadows)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2oE7UAL(Incredible Detail. Pulling this into Lightroom, I made this photographer’s photo really pop with some great presets)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pt5xse (Not great, but beats the X100 in terms of detail. Feels a bit over sharpened. Full image has that Fuji effect that doesn’t look quite right without some post processing/contrast)
  • https://flic.kr/p/2pr5T5Y(View full size image. Super clean shot in a low lit scene, with loads of detail – look at the grain on the wooden window cover on the left… something you just don’t see in X100V/VI’s)

Compare with FujiFilm X-20 with an XC 15-45mm

I’ve seen enough shots with the XC 15-45mm on the X-S20 body to know that it is simply amazing. An XC lens producing the sharpness and detail of a much more expensive lens, at the cost of an F stop.

Compare with Ricoh GR III and GR IIIx

Stepping outside the FujiFilm domain, there’s an even cheaper (lighter and smaller) camera than the X100 series. It’s the Ricoh GR III and GR IIIx cameras. The spec’s on these cameras may appear to be below the X100V and VI, but stay with me for a moment. I was blown away by the quality from this pocket-sized camera. Certainly it lacks the charm of a vintage camera body, but produces some amazing results, that at 100% the images are free of imperfections, very little moiré or sharpening artifacts.

A bit more about this camera: The Ricoh GR III and GR IIIx cost about $1,000. They are small, light handhelds. They look like old point and shoots from the 90’s (which I dislike immensely), and they have limited film simulations. The camera doesn’t have weather sealing and there’s some controversy if it collects dust onto the sensor (which is an issue as the lens can’t detach). It also is a battery hog, most people taking 5 batteries for a full days worth of shooting. However, the image quality is amazing. I feel that a 3-year-old camera body without weather sealing on a fixed lens setup should be a little less – but I the quality of shots is superb.

When I scroll through shots on the GR III, 90% are appealing to me, whereas about 10% of the X100VI are appealing to me.

Nikon Z Full Frame

The Nikon Mirrorless Full Frame line up is exceptional with detail and clarity, even with the kit lens’ it comes with. These are not the same small form factor of a GR III, but the Zf might be similar to a X100V/VI in terms of size and weight.

Nikon Z Cropped Sensor

The Nikon Z50 can pull out some very detailed shots, even with kit lens’.

Conclusions Raised

A lot of poor X100* shots are shot in the f/2 – F/7 lack details and focus. Focus starts to snap when the F stop is 8 or higher. Totally not an issue with other Fuji lenses, like the XF 27mm, XF 16mm, XF 18-55mm. I also think the AF is snapping on the wrong targets time and time again. While this could be a photographer problem, across multiple photographers, I see wide-open shots snap focus on something unimportant (necklace, basket) and miss focus on the main object in the scene (person, car, etc.)

Perhaps the X100VI is relying on contrast sharpening, this would explain why low lit scenes, or shadows are lacking details.

Outside of soft focus (even missed focus issues), there’s a lot of problems in low light, or shadows. Dynamic ranges are terrible. Sometimes shots look like flagship cell phones. If you want a light-weight alternative that delivers on quality of shot, consider these alternatives:

  • FujiFilm X-E* series performed far better, with the kit XF 27mm lens (unfortunately it’s discontinued and used prices are rising due to lack of X100VI)
  • FujiFilm X-S20 is cheaper and can be paired with a prime pancake lens for better results, or buy the kit with the XF18-55mm.
  • FujiFilm X-T series can be cheaper. The T5 is the same price, and available, yet can be paired with a far better lens.
  • Ricoh GR III and GR IIIx may not look appealing, but the images they produce are clean and detailed. Note there are issues with battery life, and reported dust intake.
  • Nikon Zf for a carry around, and a Z5 for a bit less price but holding down the image quality quite nicely. Battery life is evidently amazing as users report getting 1,000 shots on a full battery (for the z5).

Tradeoffs:

  • The X-S20 has IBIS, but is heavier and more like an SLR than the vintage body of a X100*, it also is lacking weather sealing and built in ND filters.
  • The X-E* lineup is light but lacks IBIS and weather sealing and is discontinued.
  • The X-T lineup may miss specific enhancements the X100VI brings to the table, but the T5 has the same features, except lacks a built in ND filter. It will be heavier.
  • The Ricoh GR series misses many in camera film simulations that you would find on a Fuji (but you can create your own), and lacks weather sealing but it has image stabilization and the images produced can rival some very expensive cameras (blowing away the X100VI/V in terms of image quality). There are also issues with battery consumption requiring shooters to have 3-5 batteries handy.
  • Nikon full frame Z lineups can be expensive. The Z5 is capable of very sharp images with the kit lens’ but it’s more bulky.
  • Nikon Zf is closer in shape and design to a Fuji X100VI, producing better image quality, but at a higher price point.

Taking weather sealing off as a requirement, there are several options with much better image quality:

  • X-S20
  • X-E4
  • Ricoh GR III / GR IIIx

If you must have weather sealing then there are options of the FujiFilm T line:

  • X-T4 (previous gen.)
  • X-T5 (current gen.)
  • Nikon Z5, Zf, etc.

Leave a Comment