New Fuji X100VI announced

[Harry Harrison]

https://fujifilm-x.com/global/products/cameras/x100vi/

 

Obviously an embargo has been lifted because it's all over the internet this morning, 40MP sensor like the X-T5 and IBIS. Recommended retail price is slightly less than the current X100V is going for on ebay currently. Will they be able to fulfil pre-orders I wonder, hopefully they will because people are instead having to pay over the top for secondhand models so that money is not going to Fuji. Apparently people are still waiting for pre-ordered X100Vs which they may never get now.

 

https://petapixel.com/2024/02/19/fujifilm-x100vi-hands-on-its-nearly-everything-we-wanted/

[Mr Standfast]

Thanks for posting Harry, I was bored of processing and key wording.

 

IBIS is a step up.

40Mp? I was a bit neutral but the cropping potential offsets the fixed focal length.

"A prime lens maybe the best lens, but it may not be the most appropriate lens" - Roger Cicala at Lensrentals (I think...)

$1600 is not particulary expensive.

 

If my X-Pro1 goes kaput, maybe, just maybe.

[Steve Hyde]

Here’s a review by Kevin Mullins

 

https://www.kevinmullinsphotography.co.uk/blog/fujifilm-x100vi-review

 

[Harry Harrison]

Well it does look rather nice, plenty of times when IBIS would have been handy with my X100. Not convinced that 40MP is much of an advantage over 26MP, it doesn't seem to equate with 40MP on full frame judging by DPReview's Studio image comparisons. Still for me I hope they sell in the millions and that they can keep up with supply from the new (Chinese) factory. Never was quite sure why the X100V was so hard to produce in quantity. That way the price in secondhand X100fs should fall through the floor (he said hopefully but not with much confidence).

[Mr Standfast]

1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

That way the price in secondhand X100fs should fall through the floor (he said hopefully but not with much confidence).

 

+1!

[Gervais Montacute]

I'm ordering one this evening. I had a feeling this would come out round about now in December. I'm interested in seeing how it turns out. My wife will use it 99% of the time. 

I very much doubt if the IBIS is going to be around 6 stops quite frankly. It matters not that much here anyway. Some may be disappointed. 

For jpeg shooters there looks like 20 different picture examples. I think on the wife's original it's 3. 40MP so cropping becomes less of an issue.

 

On the Fuji X100V (not sure about the previous iterations) the price will fall fairly quickly I would guess.

 

Yes, this looks like a great camera but with a few fairly insignificant flaws. Look forward to seeing it.

[Allan Bell]

It looks interesting but I could never get on with processing raw images from the X-Trans sensors. More Alamy fails when I was using Fuji than I care to remember.

 

Allan

 

[Rubens Alarcon]

32 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

It looks interesting but I could never get on with processing raw images from the X-Trans sensors. More Alamy fails when I was using Fuji than I care to remember.

 

Allan

 

 

If you are using Lightroom, there is the infamous issue of the "worms" effect when sharpening X-Trans images. You can’t crank up the Amount or Details when sharpening or you’ll get it. The solution is to use a very small amount of sharpening or none or playing with a combination of the Amount and Details sliders. I’ve been using a Fuji XT-2 camera since it was launched and never failed QC. My settings are:

Amount = 10

Radius = 0.8

Detail = 100

Masking = 20

 

OR

 

Amount = 60

Radius = 0.8

Detail = 1

Masking = 25

[Betty LaRue]

2 minutes ago, Rubens Alarcon said:

 

If you are using Lightroom, there is the infamous issue of the "worms" effect when sharpening X-Trans images. You can’t crank up the Amount or Details when sharpening or you’ll get it. The solution is to use a very small amount of sharpening or none or playing with a combination of the Amount and Details sliders. I’ve been using a Fuji XT-2 camera since it was launched and never failed QC. My settings are:

Amount = 10

Radius = 0.8

Detail = 100

Masking = 20

 

OR

 

Amount = 60

Radius = 0.8

Detail = 1

Masking = 25

I agree because all my fails came with Nikon, especially the D7000. When I switched to Fuji, the fails stopped. Others have had success with the D7000 so I expect mine might have had a back focus problem or something I never recognized since I’m so non-technical.

I've had the XT-1 & 2, & now shoot with the 4.

When I switched to Fujinon, the first time I loaded the images to my computer, I was blown away by the sharpness after what I had been seeing with my Nikon D7000. 
I think the “worms” have been mitigated somewhat, starting several years ago. I don’t see any, myself. But then, maybe my vision is non-technical also! 

[Harry Harrison]

I use an X-T2 also and have only rarely seen 'worms' in landscapes with distant and indistinct foliage or perhaps crop fields. I don't think any of this would have been a QC fail in fact but it did make me try Iridient X-Transormer and then pay for it but I don't call upon it very often. My personal opinion is that worms are more likely to occur with these types of subljects with lenses that are not used at their optimum apertures or, with zoom lenses, at focal lengths where resolution is weaker, then a certain vagueness about the details in these distant subjects can lead Adobe's processing to get it wrong, but again Adobe has improved a lot also with its Enhanced Detail.

 

Mind you I don't tend to use high ISO or sharpening, the most I wiil ever do is lift the default 25% of Lightroom 6.14 to the 40% 'CC' standard though I'm certainly going to try the settings that Rubens has suggested. I think that Betty is right to say that the 'worms' problem is not really an issue with more recent Fuji cameras and in this particular case the fixed 23mm lens on the new X100VI and the X100V before it is outstanding, a very slight improvement on the one in my original X100 when used wide open and at closer distances.

 

It is extraordinary that they've managed to fit IBIS into this small package even if they have had to keep to the same battery as the previous model and a single CF slot, I've never wanted to buy the 23mm f2 Prime lens because it is so large so I'd rather just carry an X100.

Edited February 20 by Harry Harrison

[Harry Harrison]

In fact I've never been particularly convinced that the X-Trans sensor produces better images than Bayer equivalents, I think it's just been a marketing sensation from the start. The Fuji cameras that have Bayer sensors like the X-A7 from way back, my original X100 and now the GFX series seem to have the same great colours. The X-Trans sensor actually has 6 green photosites for every 2 of blue and red, so proportionally more green than the Bayer sensor with just 2 green for every single blue and red. I just like the design oft the cameras, I'd happily use a Bayer sensor X-T2 if they made one to the same quality.

[Allan Bell]

11 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

In fact I've never been particularly convinced that the X-Trans sensor produces better images than Bayer equivalents, I think it's just been a marketing sensation from the start. The Fuji cameras that have Bayer sensors like the X-A7 from way back, my original X100 and now the GFX series seem to have the same great colours. The X-Trans sensor actually has 6 green photosites for every 2 of blue and red, so proportionally more green than the Bayer sensor with just 2 green for every single blue and red. I just like the design oft the cameras, I'd happily use a Bayer sensor X-T2 if they made one to the same quality.

 

I did like the Fuji cameras and lenses, the cameras in particular with the dials on top like the analog cameras before.  IF Fuji had kept with the Bayer sensors I would still be using them and not Sony.

 

Allan

 

[Harry Harrison]

Well, fancy that, a Fuji X00VI has appeared on ebay UK for £2,399, listed as "pre-order confirmed - ships 28/02/24". Official UK pre-order price is £1599.

[Rubens Alarcon]

16 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

I use an X-T2 also and have only rarely seen 'worms' in landscapes with distant and indistinct foliage or perhaps crop fields. I don't think any of this would have been a QC fail in fact but it did make me try Iridient X-Transormer and then pay for it but I don't call upon it very often. My personal opinion is that worms are more likely to occur with these types of subljects with lenses that are not used at their optimum apertures or, with zoom lenses, at focal lengths where resolution is weaker, then a certain vagueness about the details in these distant subjects can lead Adobe's processing to get it wrong, but again Adobe has improved a lot also with its Enhanced Detail.

 

Mind you I don't tend to use high ISO or sharpening, the most I wiil ever do is lift the default 25% of Lightroom 6.14 to the 40% 'CC' standard though I'm certainly going to try the settings that Rubens has suggested. I think that Betty is right to say that the 'worms' problem is not really an issue with more recent Fuji cameras and in this particular case the fixed 23mm lens on the new X100VI and the X100V before it is outstanding, a very slight improvement on the one in my original X100 when used wide open and at closer distances.

 

It is extraordinary that they've managed to fit IBIS into this small package even if they have had to keep to the same battery as the previous model and a single CF slot, I've never wanted to buy the 23mm f2 Prime lens because it is so large so I'd rather just carry an X100.

Yes, the worms only appear if you apply a "too generous" amount of sharpening to the images. That is why I never go over certain limits when, and if, I apply sharpening. The X100VI seems to be the perfect camera for what I shoot, but I already have a good collection of lenses so I'm more inclined to go for the X-T5 or wait for the X-T6 when I upgrade.

[Gervais Montacute]

4 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

Well, fancy that, a Fuji X00VI has appeared on ebay UK for £2,399, listed as "pre-order confirmed - ships 28/02/24". Official UK pre-order price is £1599.

 

Not surprising. A lot of the ebay Leica Q3's looked like and probably were scams. I saw many of them removed by ebay very quickly. It's possible that the Fuji VI won't have that much of a waiting time. Certainly nothing like the Leica Q3.

[Steve Hyde]

Here’s another very positive Fuji Ambassador review. However, I’ll be hanging on for the rumoured X-Pro 4 for now.

https://jonasraskphotography.com/2024/02/20/returning-to-form-the-fujifilm-x100vi-review/

[Harry Harrison]

Another speculative pre-ordered X100VI on the popular auction site, this one for £2990. I see you can still pay £1400 for a used X100F, I can remember a friend bought a very nice one, about a year old, for £710. Those were the days.

[AlexH]

On 20/02/2024 at 23:35, Harry Harrison said:

In fact I've never been particularly convinced that the X-Trans sensor produces better images than Bayer equivalents, I think it's just been a marketing sensation from the start. The Fuji cameras that have Bayer sensors like the X-A7 from way back, my original X100 and now the GFX series seem to have the same great colours. The X-Trans sensor actually has 6 green photosites for every 2 of blue and red, so proportionally more green than the Bayer sensor with just 2 green for every single blue and red. I just like the design oft the cameras, I'd happily use a Bayer sensor X-T2 if they made one to the same quality.

To some extent the whole success of the Fuji retro styled cameras, the X100 variants in particular, has been down to brilliant marketing that's taken on a snowballing life of its own. No doubt they are nice cameras but they sell as much as fashion items.

 

[Harry Harrison]

2 hours ago, AlexH said:

No doubt they are nice cameras but they sell as much as fashion items.

Particularly as a response to social media influencers during COVID, they really took off, first with the Fuji X100V that was the current model then but then all their cameras followed on behind, the worlwide shortage won't have done their reputation any harm either. I think they just lucked out in fact but it wouldn't have happened if they weren't good cameras in the first place with their analogue design and the X100 in particular is truly unique.

 

Before all that though of there is the mystique around the X-Trans sensor and that really was brilliant marketing from the start. There is a technical benefit underying that arrangement of pixels in that ther 6x6 pixel grid enabled them to do without the anti-alias filter but still avoid Moire (mostly). This page from DxO goes into it in detail, I've only just come across it in fact and to my surprise they too talk about the comparitive predominence of green that should really make the X-Trans sensor less sensitive to colour. DxO chose not to deal with X-Trans files until recently but it seems now that they are using neural networks to help.

Edited February 24 by Harry Harrison

[Julie Edwards]

On 20/02/2024 at 23:35, Harry Harrison said:

In fact I've never been particularly convinced that the X-Trans sensor produces better images than Bayer equivalents, I think it's just been a marketing sensation from the start. The Fuji cameras that have Bayer sensors like the X-A7 from way back, my original X100 and now the GFX series seem to have the same great colours. The X-Trans sensor actually has 6 green photosites for every 2 of blue and red, so proportionally more green than the Bayer sensor with just 2 green for every single blue and red. I just like the design oft the cameras, I'd happily use a Bayer sensor X-T2 if they made one to the same quality.

 

 

The colour layout means there is no anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor = "sharper" ...  in theory  ... The only way to know for sure would be to put a bayer in the same body. 

 

I always found, back in the day, that my  X-Pro1 was sharper than my original x100...

[Julie Edwards]

16 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

DxO chose not to deal with X-Trans files until recently but it seems now that they are using neural networks to help.

 

PureRAW does a really nice job on Xtrans files now...

 

https://julieedwards-x.blog/2024/01/04/unleashing-my-inner-gru/

 

 

[Harry Harrison]

39 minutes ago, Julie Edwards said:

I always found, back in the day, that my  X-Pro1 was sharper than my original x100...

Well it has a few more pixels, I still have both in fact. The DPReview 'Studio scene' is a pretty good reference and although I've tried I've never been able to convince myself that there is any more detail from my X-T2 than there is from, say, a Sony A6xxx series, both APS-C and 24MP of course, or between the 40MP X-T5 and the 36MP Nikon D810 or the 42MP Sony A7RII. Which is absolutely fine of course  but if I was needing to convince someone as to how great the X-Trans sensor is then I don't think I'd be able to on that front anyway. I do think they're great cameras though.

 

Edit: "I still have both in fact" - and that's a testament as well, they're very well made and Fuji would always keep updating them with firmware updates. I've read that might have changed though.

Edited February 25 by Harry Harrison

[Harry Harrison]

6 pre-order Fuji X100VIs on the popular auction site now with prices ranging from £1865 to £2990, market forces live on screen.

Edited February 25 by Harry Harrison

[DDoug]

On 21/02/2024 at 00:02, Harry Harrison said:

I use an X-T2 also and have only rarely seen 'worms' in landscapes with distant and indistinct foliage or perhaps crop fields. I don't think any of this would have been a QC fail in fact but it did make me try Iridient X-Transormer and then pay for it but I don't call upon it very often. My personal opinion is that worms are more likely to occur with these types of subljects with lenses that are not used at their optimum apertures or, with zoom lenses, at focal lengths where resolution is weaker, then a certain vagueness about the details in these distant subjects can lead Adobe's processing to get it wrong, but again Adobe has improved a lot also with its Enhanced Detail.

 

Mind you I don't tend to use high ISO or sharpening, the most I wiil ever do is lift the default 25% of Lightroom 6.14 to the 40% 'CC' standard though I'm certainly going to try the settings that Rubens has suggested. I think that Betty is right to say that the 'worms' problem is not really an issue with more recent Fuji cameras and in this particular case the fixed 23mm lens on the new X100VI and the X100V before it is outstanding, a very slight improvement on the one in my original X100 when used wide open and at closer distances.

 

I’ve been using Fujifilm cameras for a decade and in the last couple of years have gone back to Silkypix for raw processing. I’m using Developer Studio Pro 11 for Fujifilm and version 10 that works on everything, should I want to go back to old files from other cameras. Silkypix provides Provia, Astia, Kodachrome, monochrome, a couple of Velvia variants and other choices. Unlike shooting in-camera JPEGs, these color tastes are chosen during processing. There’s also auto and manual corrections for distortion, CA, vignetting, vertical/horizontal alignment, HDR, dehaze, etc. I’ve never had an image rejected because of “worms” and I like the “pure detail” option in sharpening.

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, DDoug said:

’ve been using Fujifilm cameras for a decade and in the last couple of years have gone back to Silkypix for raw processing.

I hope I'm not wrong but I'm pretty sure that you preferred your Bayer sensor Fuji for slide copying, that was the first time I really began to wonder about it and I think I bought X-Transormer shortly after that. Do you happen to know what relationship the in-camera jpeg processing has with SilkyPix, if any?

Edited February 25 by Harry Harrison