Fujifilm has been working for years to “mainstream” medium format. They made a unique decision to embrace the smaller APS-C sensor (Fuji XF) and the large medium format sensor (Fuji GF) while bypassing the popular full frame sensor where most of the major brands live. The goal has been to make medium format competitive with full frame offerings from other brands, and the Fujifilm GFX-100S II might just be the one to finally pull in some of those who have been straddling the fence. The GFX100S II borrows many of the serious improvements of the GFX-100 II and distills them at a much lower price point ($5000 vs $7500 USD). What’s even more surprising about that price is that it is $1000 LESS than the GFX100S that it is replacing. There are still a number of areas where GFX cameras lag behind the best full frame cameras, but there’s also no question that no full frame camera I’ve tested delivers the kind of image quality you can achieve with Fuji’s big sensor cameras, and the 102MP medium format sensor in the GFX100S II is a big winner. Find out my full thoughts in my video review below or in the full text review here…or just enjoy the photos below.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review, and the thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.
Here’s a basic breakdown of the key features of the GFX100S II:
Spec List
102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS II Sensor
X-Processor 5 Image Processor
4K30 Video; F-Log2 Gamma
5.76m-Dot OLED EVF
3.2″ 2.36m-Dot Tilting Touchscreen LCD
5-Axis Sensor-Shift Image Stabilization
ISO 80-12800, up to 7 fps Shooting
400MP Pixel Shift Multi-Shot
8-Stop Image Stabilization
20 Film Simulation Modes
I spent some quality time with the upmarket GFX100 II in 2023, and as I’ve compared the two cameras, here are some of the key areas that I’ve seen differences. This might help you decide whether the GFX100 II is worth the extra money:
7 FPS vs 8FPS
Lower resolution EVF (5.76m vs 9.44m dot)
4K30 vs 8K30
2 x SD cards vs CFExpress Type B and SD
Micro HDMI vs full size HDMI
19 Lossless RAW buffer vs 302 Lossless RAW buffer
There are other minor differences, but essentially it boils down to slightly faster burst rate and much deeper buffer depth due to supporting a faster memory card spec, a higher resolution EVF, and the GFX100 II has much more capable video features. The good news is that if you just want to take amazing photos and not pretend this is a video or action camera, the GFX100S II is going to be an easy way to save $2500…and maybe buy that first lens or two instead.
But where things get crazy is when you compare the GFX100S II to the GFX100S.
New and improved sensor (base ISO of 80)
Higher resolution viewfinder (5.76m vs 3.96m)
7 vs 5fps
Lighter
Better battery life
IBIS 8 vs 6 stops
New grip material
$1000 cheaper!
I’m not sure we’ve ever seen a clear camera upgrade that also managed to come with a price reduction of nearly 20%!
Before we dive in to the good stuff, let’s get a few relevant details out of the way. Purists will point out that Fujifilm’s GFX sensor is not actually true medium format. It’s true that the sensor size (43.8 x 32mm) is about halfway between a full frame sensor (35.9 x 24mm) and Hasselblad’s 53 x 40mm sensor size. You can see a comparison of sensor size below:
While Fuji’s sensor is smaller than the larger Hasselbad/Phase One sensor, it is worth noting that it is also nearly 70% bigger than the full frame standard! But the GFX 100S has even more accessible resolution due to having IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization), as stabilization is really important to getting excellent results where so much resolution is on tap. That makes each individual pixel about 30% bigger, which has the advantage of smoother gradations of color and light. There’s something very special about the rendering from medium format. I definitely think that Fuji’s higher resolution point (the 102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS Sensor found in this camera) is by far the preferred option largely because the 50MP resolution point has a lot of full frame competitors, and, in my opinion, the current limitations of using medium format cameras are not outweighed by the sensor advantages in the 50MP sensor. This 102MP sensor has a clear advantage over anything currently available on full frame, making it unique and special. The ability to deeply crop images is like nothing else out there. You truly have the ability to create a variety of images from one frame:
You’ll note that the chart in the opening section also shows the various crop factors associated with the size of the relative sensors. A full frame sensor has a 1.0x crop factor, and the industry standard for focal lengths is in the full frame/35mm standard because of this. A 100mm lens, then, will behave like 100mm on the 35mm/full frame sensor, while the same lens mounted on a Fuji APS-C sensor (1.5x crop factor), will behave like a 150mm lens (full frame equivalent) in terms of focal length. Mount that same focal length on Fuji’s medium format (0.79x crop factor), and it will behave like a 79mm focal length. This helps explain why many of the focal lengths of Fuji’s GF lenses are atypical. The 55mm F1.7 I used in this review has a full frame equivalent of 44mm.
Fuji also has a very interesting new 500mm F5.6 lens that I’ve covered in the review as well, so check it out!
Keywords: GFX, GFX100S II, GFX 100S II, 100S, II, 102MP, Fujifilm, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, Medium Format, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA #letthelightin, #DA, #Fujifilm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fujifilm has been working for years to “mainstream” medium format. They made a unique decision to embrace the smaller APS-C sensor (Fuji XF) and the large medium format sensor (Fuji GF) while bypassing the popular full frame sensor where most of the major brands live. The goal has been to make medium format competitive with full frame offerings from other brands, and the Fujifilm GFX-100S II might just be the one to finally pull in some of those who have been straddling the fence. The GFX100S II borrows many of the serious improvements of the GFX-100 II and distills them at a much lower price point ($5000 vs $7500 USD). What’s even more surprising about that price is that it is $1000 LESS than the GFX100S that it is replacing. There are still a number of areas where GFX cameras lag behind the best full frame cameras, but there’s also no question that no full frame camera I’ve tested delivers the kind of image quality you can achieve with Fuji’s big sensor cameras, and the 102MP medium format sensor in the GFX100S II is a big winner. Find out my full thoughts in my video review here.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review, and the thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.
Here’s a basic breakdown of the key features of the GFX100S II:
Spec List
102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS II Sensor
X-Processor 5 Image Processor
4K30 Video; F-Log2 Gamma
5.76m-Dot OLED EVF
3.2″ 2.36m-Dot Tilting Touchscreen LCD
5-Axis Sensor-Shift Image Stabilization
ISO 80-12800, up to 7 fps Shooting
400MP Pixel Shift Multi-Shot
8-Stop Image Stabilization
20 Film Simulation Modes
I spent some quality time with the upmarket GFX100 II in 2023, and as I’ve compared the two cameras, here are some of the key areas that I’ve seen differences. This might help you decide whether the GFX100 II is worth the extra money:
7 FPS vs 8FPS
Lower resolution EVF (5.76m vs 9.44m dot)
4K30 vs 8K30
2 x SD cards vs CFExpress Type B and SD
Micro HDMI vs full size HDMI
19 Lossless RAW buffer vs 302 Lossless RAW buffer
There are other minor differences, but essentially it boils down to slightly faster burst rate and much deeper buffer depth due to supporting a faster memory card spec, a higher resolution EVF, and the GFX100 II has much more capable video features. The good news is that if you just want to take amazing photos and not pretend this is a video or action camera, the GFX100S II is going to be an easy way to save $2500…and maybe buy that first lens or two instead.
But where things get crazy is when you compare the GFX100S II to the GFX100S.
New and improved sensor (base ISO of 80)
Higher resolution viewfinder (5.76m vs 3.96m)
7 vs 5fps
Lighter
Better battery life
IBIS 8 vs 6 stops
New grip material
$1000 cheaper!
I’m not sure we’ve ever seen a clear camera upgrade that also managed to come with a price reduction of nearly 20%!
Before we dive in to the good stuff, let’s get a few relevant details out of the way. Purists will point out that Fujifilm’s GFX sensor is not actually true medium format. It’s true that the sensor size (43.8 x 32mm) is about halfway between a full frame sensor (35.9 x 24mm) and Hasselblad’s 53 x 40mm sensor size. You can see a comparison of sensor size below:
While Fuji’s sensor is smaller than the larger Hasselbad/Phase One sensor, it is worth noting that it is also nearly 70% bigger than the full frame standard! But the GFX 100S has even more accessible resolution due to having IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization), as stabilization is really important to getting excellent results where so much resolution is on tap. That makes each individual pixel about 30% bigger, which has the advantage of smoother gradations of color and light. There’s something very special about the rendering from medium format. I definitely think that Fuji’s higher resolution point (the 102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS Sensor found in this camera) is by far the preferred option largely because the 50MP resolution point has a lot of full frame competitors, and, in my opinion, the current limitations of using medium format cameras are not outweighed by the sensor advantages in the 50MP sensor. This 102MP sensor has a clear advantage over anything currently available on full frame, making it unique and special. The ability to deeply crop images is like nothing else out there. You truly have the ability to create a variety of images from one frame:
You’ll note that the chart in the opening section also shows the various crop factors associated with the size of the relative sensors. A full frame sensor has a 1.0x crop factor, and the industry standard for focal lengths is in the full frame/35mm standard because of this. A 100mm lens, then, will behave like 100mm on the 35mm/full frame sensor, while the same lens mounted on a Fuji APS-C sensor (1.5x crop factor), will behave like a 150mm lens (full frame equivalent) in terms of focal length. Mount that same focal length on Fuji’s medium format (0.79x crop factor), and it will behave like a 79mm focal length. This helps explain why many of the focal lengths of Fuji’s GF lenses are atypical. The 55mm F1.7 I used in this review has a full frame equivalent of 44mm.
Fuji also has a very interesting new 500mm F5.6 lens that I’ll be covering as a part of this review.
Build and Features
The GFX100S II is very similar to the GFX100S in size, though there are some key improvements ported over from the GFX100 II. It has the same BISHAMON-TEX™ texture to the grip and the body, which is instantly my favorite grip material ever. It looks modern, sleek, and sophisticated, and feels great in the hands.
Everything about medium format is chunky if you’re accustomed to smaller formats. I was doing a concurrent lens review on my Sony a7RV body, and it felt like a toy when I went back and forth to it from the GFX100 II.
If you are unfamiliar with medium format and know Fuji more for X-mount, prepare to be shocked by how huge the mount size actually is. That opening to the sensor is massive – much bigger than the Fuji’s APS-C sensors or any full frame camera.
The inner mount diameter is 65mm, which is significantly larger than Fuji’s own APS-C X-mount (44mm), Sony E-mount (46.1mm), Canon’s RF (54mm), or Nikon’s Z mount (55mm). The front opening of lenses changes according to the focal length and aperture combination, but the rear diameter at the mount is consistent. This means that medium format lenses are going to be bigger than comparative Sony full frame lenses as a matter of course, because they start at nearly a 66% larger diameter. I used the GF 55mm F1.7 WR as one of my test lenses for this review, and it (like many shorter lenses for the system) is actually larger in diameter than it is in length…and noticeably more chunky at the lens mount.
This body is smaller than the GFX100 II, measuring 5.9 x 4.1 x 3.4″ (150 x 104.2 x 87.2 mm). That’s only 2.5mm narrower in width, but it is a full 13mm shorter and the grip is 11.5mm shallower. The end result is a camera that is actually smaller in volume than my full frame Nikon Z8 (1.36m vs 1.42m total millimeters in volume) and actually feels better in the hand due to a better shaped grip. I particularly find the rear of the grip where the thumb rests to be inspired; I feel like the camera fits really tightly and yet comfortably in my hand. This is not a small camera, but it is easily comfortable enough to use as a daily camera.
I personally didn’t love the body of the GFX100, as I found it unnecessarily large. It had the chunkiest grip of any camera I’ve used (the camera is 102.9mm/4.05″ deep), and while I have medium large hands, it felt just slightly uncomfortable – like I was having to stretch a bit. But the GFX100S II feels fantastic in my hands.
The weight is very manageable too despite the huge sensor. At 883g (1.9lb) with memory cards and battery inserted, it is actually 27g lighter than my Z8. My point is that the huge size and weight of earlier GFX cameras is no longer a barrier to making the switch from full frame when you have mainstream full frame bodies that are larger and heavier!
The GFX100S II has a robust magnesium alloy body that feels slightly more upscale than my four different full frame cameras from different brands. While the weather sealing isn’t quite as substantial as the more expensive GFX100 II, it has a total of 60 seal points, which is enough that I suspect most people won’t know the difference.
Fuji utilizes the fairly ubiquitous 2200Mah NP-W235 battery pack that I see in a lot of cameras. Surprisingly it is rated for 530 rather than the 540 shots the GFX100 II is rated for. I’m not sure why the rating would be lower here, but that’s obviously such a small difference that you’ll probably never notice. Getting a spare is always a good idea. You have different charging options including charging in camera.
On the right side there is a memory card compartment that houses dual SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-II) card slots. This is one of the key areas of differention with the GFX100 II, as it replaces one of the SD slots with the much faster CFExpress Type B cards. This is a big part of why the GFX100 II has much deeper buffers and 8K video options that the GFX100S II is lacking. To be fair, though, I’m still not convinced that medium format is a worthy alternative for sports work anyway. There is also a 3.5mm remote release port located on this side.
The left side of the camera has the other ports, and once again we see the downgrades from the GFX100 II. There is no ethernet port, with the top section housing a 3.5mm mic input along with a 3.5mm headphone monitoring output instead. The bottom compartment houses a USB-C port, micro HDMI jack (rather than full size on the GFX100 II), and a flash sync port. The compartment doors feel good, though the ports on this side dangle instead of being hinged, making them a little fiddly to pop back into place. This is a more traditional Fuji medium format camera that isn’t trying to be a sports camera or video alternative. The overall layout is basically identical to the original GFX100S model which it is replacing save with the improved grip material of the GFX100 II.
Fuji’s XF cameras are typically known by their plethora of physical controls (particularly dials), so it is more than a little ironic that their flagship cameras (with so much large bodies) offer far fewer controls. That doesn’t mean that the handling is bad, however; it just means that you need to spend a little time getting the camera set up the way you want.
The GFX100S II has a flat upper LCD screen that doesn’t have the tilt found on the GFX100 II. I liked the tilt as it made the screen more visible, but to be fair I had forgotten the tilt of the GFX100 II until I read through my review notes! The “Sub-LCD” is bright and clear and retains a passive display when the camera is powered off. You have three options for what is displayed on the top display, though you will need to change that in the menus unless you dedicate one of the two custom buttons next to the display to that task. It’s probably unlikely that you will change the display often enough to waste one of those valuable buttons on that. The three modes include one that imitates two dials, which shift depending on what mode you are in, a second simply shows histogram, and the third (and, in my opinion, the most useful), shows you a variety of information about shutter speed, ISO, aperture, exposure compensation, and more.) This screen is informational, not functional, in that changes are made via the front or rear dials rather than interacting with the screen itself. A button to the left of the screen will light up the top LCD if you are working in a dimly lit environment. I find this top screen very useful.
As mentioned, there are two custom buttons next to the top LCD that can be used for a variety of functions, and there is a much smaller third button next to the shutter that is dedicated to exposure compensation. By default you hold down that button and use the rear wheel to bias exposure one direction or the other. The front and rear wheel will typically be used to control shutter speed and aperture, though they can be customized to other functions.
I would still like to see a third wheel on the back of the camera (Canon/Sony style) that could be assigned a function without having to use a button. Case in point: by default the front control wheel beneath the shutter button needs to be clicked in to switch between aperture control and ISO control in my typical mode (AV). It’s a little clunky when I just rotate the rear wheel on my Sony or Canon cameras to interact with ISO.
On the front of the camera there is one further custom button located above the lens release. It can be programmed to a wide variety of functions.
On the left side of the viewfinder are two other control points. One is a traditional mode dial though with a whopping 6 custom modes. I like both the many custom modes and also the mode dial; it remains an easy, logical way to navigate different camera modes. There is a locking button in the middle. There’s also a switch that allows you to go from stills to movie function (allowing you to have a custom setup for both modes).
The main LCD screen is a 3.2″ 2.36 million dot touchscreen that can tilt on two axis – this allows you to get some function even when shooting at odd angles and in portrait orientation. I still prefer a fully articulating screen, but Fuji has resisted the use of fully articulating screens in their medium format bodies. As per usual, I was frustrated to find that the touch function has still not improved one bit from the day that I started testing Fuji cameras. You can use touch on the screen for touch to focus and shoot, but menu navigation is limited to the Q (quick) menu; you cannot navigate the main menu via touch. There’s also a bit more lag than recent Canon or Sony bodies when you touch. I do find Fuji’s quick menus a little frustrating, too, as what intuitively feels like a click to select (on the joystick) saves the selection and closes the menu, which often necessitates my opening it again to make other selections.
Unlike the GFX100 II, the GFX100S II is not compatible with Fuji’s FAN-001 accessory.
The back of the camera has the typical collection of buttons and the mini-joystick common to Fuji’s designs. The joystick feels nice and has a good texture. The control wheels on the front and back can also be clicked in for an additional function. I like the mode selector near the viewfinder that allows you to quickly move between Single Shot, Continuous AF, and Manual Focus along with the great implementation of the Q button.
The viewfinder is a traditional, fixed variety (not like the removable option on the GFX100 II. It does have a resolution upgrade compared to the GFX100S, however, and is now 5.76 million dots rather than 3.69m dot. It also has a bit higher magnification (0.84x vs 0.77x). Overall the viewfinder is nice and clear and generally a joy to use. It’s not as exceptional as the amazing viewfinder of the GFX100 II, but is a nice upgrade in resolution over the original GFX100S.
At the moment there is no battery grip option for the GFX100S II.
The GFX100 II body has truly impressive in-camera stabilization that is CIPA rated up to 8 stops. I was able to get very effective stability for handholding stills and video. The camera is noticeably stable in operation, making it easy to handhold video footage or normal photos at low shutter speeds. I’ve been using the new GF 500mm F5.6 R LM OIS lens during this review, and it is definitely a joy to get great stabilization even with (finally) a longer focal length on the platform. Here’s a crop from a shot of my bees that I shot at 500mm, 1/50th of a second.
All told, while there isn’t a lot different on the outside when compared to the GFX100S, there are some key improvements. The grip material is beautiful, the body feels very robust and well made, and there are improvements to the viewfinder and IBIS. I still want that third wheel in the back, though, as I think it would help to making changes on the fly much more intuitive.
At the same time, however, this isn’t a hard camera to use, and getting a highly functional medium format camera for $5000 is a huge win for consumers who want to experiment with the truly BIG sensor.
Autofocus Performance
Fuji’s goal has been to make a previously inaccessible format more “populist” by giving its medium format cameras autofocus performance that is close to what’s achievable on smaller formats. Every generation is to be “the one” where autofocus truly catches up, but there is of course the reality that this is a moving target. Whether or not Fuji has been successful largely depends on what you use as a standard. If you are comparing with the historical reality on medium format, then they have achieved great success. It was not uncommon for medium format cameras a decade ago to have just a few autofocus points or even a single autofocus point. If your point of comparison is Fuji’s smaller sensor cameras, then you can also consider what Fuji has done a success. Autofocus performance isn’t quite at the level of my X-H2, but it isn’t far off.
But if your point of comparison is the alternate full frame cameras from Canon, Sony, or Nikon, then it’s not even close. The most recent full frame cameras from those companies (or APS-C cameras, for that matter) are still WAY out in front of the autofocus system in any Fuji camera. I test nearly a hundred lenses per year, and I can safely say that just about any sub $300 autofocus lens made for Sony or Nikon is going to deliver a better autofocus experience than what I find with the best and most expensive lenses on Fuji.
Here is the problem right here: “Thanks to an improved predictive AF algorithm, GFX100S II delivers enhanced subject tracking and improved AF accuracy in low-contrast environments, compared to its predecessor, the GFX100S.” That’s taken from Fuji’s own website. My first review of a Fuji camera was the X-T3, which I reviewed in 2018. That camera had the last major hardware update to the autofocus system that I’ve seen on Fuji over the subsequent 13 Fuji camera reviews that I’ve done. The advance on the X-T3 was the hybrid of contrast and phase detect autofocus systems, with 425 selectable phase detect autofocus points across the frame. Every subsequent “upgrade” since this point has been more about updating/improving focusing algorithms and the use of AI in some cameras to help make tracking more predictive with certain trackable subjects.
But what I’ve found is that Fuji is falling further and further behind the competitors. The X-T3 was fairly competitive in 2018, but six years later, everyone else has improved their hardware along with their processing to achieve vastly improved AF systems. This is the same basic AF system Fuji has been using for six years at this point with essentially a new coat of paint over it. So, as has been the story for my past five or six GFX reviews, the autofocus is better than alternate medium format systems but is in no way really a substitute for what full frame cameras from other brands are delivering. As long as your expectations are realistic, however, you should be satisfied with what you get from the GFX100S II, which has essentially the same autofocus system that we saw in the GFX100 II.
The X-Processor 5 adds AI tracking of a wide variety of subjects and a faster, more intuitive focus process. Tracking recognizable subjects has gotten better. When I switched into “Bird” tracking (which is the proper choice for tracking insects), for example, I saw a little green box lock onto a bee on one of my hives and started tracking her. You can see that the end result (at 500mm) is focused more on her torso than her eyes, but still, not bad.
Trackable subjects include humans (obviously), along with animals, birds, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, airplanes, trains, insects, and drones. For insects you select birds as mentioned, and for drones you select airplanes.
A shot of a neighbor’s cat in their yard delivered well focused results even from a distance.
Autofocus is generally fairly bulletproof for grabbing the eye area now, though sometimes focus will still grab the eyelid or lash rather than the iris. This shot of Ferrari from the side and with the eye barely visible still shows fairly good results.
Introduce some movement into the scene, however, and the AF system often doesn’t quite keep up. I tried to get shots of Nala as she rolled around, and you can see that in this frozen moment in the sequence focus isn’t really anywhere near her eye.
I also found that my results when shooting birds in flight with the GF 500 was really hit and miss. It takes a bit to acquire focus sometimes, and once the AI is tracking, it does reasonably well, but the perfect focus rate is still considerably below what I expect from the cameras I personally own. I had some definite misses in sequences where I would typically expect to get well focused results.
But other situations the tracking did fairly good until the subject got too near the edge of the frame. There is some blackout in between frames, which makes it a little harder to smoothly pan with the subject.
Focus reactiveness is still not on par with any of the current full frame options, so there will be plenty of moments where focus is still adjusting and you miss the shot. It’s not unusual to have a focus rack in the wrong direction (particularly with the big GF 500) and thus focus take longer than what you like, and focus will sometimes get “stuck” and it takes focusing on a difference subject or even manually focusing to get things where you want. But fortunately most of the time focus works pretty well. And when you nail focus, you can get amazing detail (even with the 1.4x TC attached, so 700mm here).
This is not a sports camera (despite Fuji’s marketing to the contrary), but it would make for a good portrait and general purpose camera at this point. One other thing you will have to adjust to, however, is shutter lag if you’re coming from another system. There’s a brief but noticeable lag between the moment you click the shutter button and the photo is actually taken. If you are shooting a burst, subsequent frames come faster, but there is a tiny lag in the first frame.
I also found that autofocus sensitivity in low light was good, able to still autofocus (though at slower speeds) in very dim lighting conditions.
Autofocus also worked well for landscape shots or shots with larger depth of field:
The focus system is largely the same as the GFX100 II, but, as mentioned, the buffer is not. I like to use Lossless Compressed RAW (where available) as a standard of comparison, as it is probably the most useful of the file formats. By that standard, the GFX100 II had deep buffers (particularly when consider that each file is 102MP!), capable of storing over 300 Compressed RAW images before slowing down (at a burst rate of 8FPS). That means you could hold down the shutter for nearly 38 seconds and have a constant burst rate. The GFX100S II is severely limited by having just SD cards, as it has to push identically sized files through a much smaller pipeline. The burst rate is 7FPS, which is not much slower, but the buffer depth for Lossless Compress RAW files is just 19 frames by comparison, meaning that you have less than a 3 second window to capture the action before the buffer fills. Here’s a look at a chart from Fuji showing buffer depth in different formats and configurations.
I’m not sure that this is a huge deal for most people, however, as I’ve already mentioned that the focus system is less than ideal for sports anyway. If you think you need the ability to shoot protracted bursts, you’ll need to pony up for the GFX100 II instead.
The GFX100S II isn’t quite as capable for video, either, though video AF is about the same. Focus pulls were relatively fast and smooth for medium format (though this will obviously be lens specific). I also saw less obvious stepping. But what I also saw was a frequent lack of confidence in locking focus. There were a few focus pulses and sometimes focus never transitioned properly to the new subject. In real world shooting I also saw some hunting and pulsing in landscape scenes, though most were okay.
My hand test was fairly successful, and while focus transitions were slow enough that sometimes I had started the next movement before it arrived there, a few of the cycles were accurate and smooth. My experience with Fuji’s current state of autofocus across its cameras is that the AF system works best when a trackable subject is in the frame.
I wouldn’t characterize the AF as quite as good as the X-H2 or X-H2S, but it’s close. There isn’t much of a gap between the AF in Fuji’s large and small sensor cameras now, and that’s huge progress. Just don’t expect the AF performance to match the current AF systems in Canon, Sony, or Nikon full frame cameras. It’s all about having reasonable expectations…
Video Performance
This is another key area of differentiation between the GFX100S II and the GFX100 II. Fuji went all in on the video side of things with the GFX100 II. Those improvements included autofocus improvements (AI tracking is available in both video and stills), formats and resolutions (up to 8K30 or 4K60), a new film simulation (REALA ACE), a base ISO of 100, and even a wide variety of framing options. The GFX100S II isn’t nearly as robust when it comes to the available video modes and options. At 4K the maximum available resolution is 30FPS, and there are no higher options available.
4K options include 17:9 or 16:9 framing with bitrates as high as 720Mbps or as little as 50Mbps. Full HD options range only as fast as 60FPS, so there aren’t really any slow motion options available.
There are some Apple ProRes options, though these seems to be limited to external recording to an SSD (via USB-C).
Internal recording is limited to 10 bit, but the GFX100S II also has the ability to output 12 bit RAW via HDMI along with some 10 bit options. They have limited frame rates to the same options available internally, however. Here’s a look at the options available via HDMI output (to an external device).
Another interesting addition is the ability to record directly to an external SSD via the USB-C port. You can record both stills and video directly to an external drive.
Also included is Fuji’s F-Log2 option for advanced editing capabilities. Fuji claims more than 14 stops of dynamic range is potentially available with F-Log2. Fuji has also included waveforms and vectorscopes for more advanced monitoring of colors and exposure during video capture.
I’m not sure how much of a draw the advanced video specs for the GFX100 II have been, but while the format options are much limited here, there’s still enough on the GFX100S II to get some great looking footage.
Sensor Performance
The GFX100S II has inherited the upgraded new 102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS II Sensor that debuted in the GFX100 II. While the resolution is the same as the GFX100S, this is a new and improved sensor that delivers the finest image quality that I’ve ever seen. Because this is the same sensor as the GFX100 II, I will be using my tests from that camera here, though the references will be updated to the GFX100S II (my review cycle with the GFX100S II was both brief and happened during a period where I had many reviews going on).
We’ve got a massive 11648 x 8736 pixels in 4:3 crop mode, and Fuji provides a variety of other framing options in camera (though it’s worth noting that RAW images will still show up as the full resolution 4:3 files). The amount of detail that a camera like this can generate is just staggering, and the extremely high resolution means that you have near unlimited potential for cropping, be it a portrait:
…or a landscape scene:
Files are going to be big, obviously, though you have considerable control over that that. You can choose Uncompressed RAW files in either 16 or 14 bit (around 200MB, with 16 bit only slightly larger), Lossless Compressed RAW in 16 bit (near 120MB) or 14 bit (92MB), or Compressed RAW at 69MB (16 bit) or 60MB (14 bit). JPEGs are around 43MB or slightly smaller depending upon the quality you choose. You also have the ability to choose DCF, HEIF, or TIFF formats.
The sweet spot for me is the Lossless RAW files, which are indistinguishable from the Uncompressed RAW files. It’s called “Lossless” for a reason. I dare you to spot the difference between the two here:
I also saw only a very minor difference in contrast when comparing 16 bit lossless (left side) with 14 bit lossless (right side):
You can save a little more file space by choosing the Lossless 14 bit option and still get very near maximum performance.
I’ve always preferred Fuji’s 100MP sensors to the 50MP sensors, as the huge resolution numbers match the larger format better in my mind. The end results (which are the real reason to choose medium format) just feel more special. In my photographer career to this point these sensors are the pinnacle of what I’ve personally used in terms of image quality. Images are just…special.
A larger sensor area means that pixels themselves are larger, which, in theory, allows for less noise, better dynamic range, and smoother transitions. I’ve always favored full frame sensors over APS-C for that reason, and Fuji’s “medium-format-lite” sensor takes that further still, though the difference between full frame and the 0.79x crop of Fuji’s medium format isn’t as pronounced as the difference in sensor size between full frame and APS-C. But consider this: Fuji’s medium format sensor size is roughly 4x larger than the surface area of their APS-C sensor, so there is a huge difference between those two extremes. What we will find is that this adds up to better ISO performance, better dynamic range, and also better colors and overall tonality to images.
ISO Performance
A major change here is that the base ISO is now 80 rather than 100 with the new sensor. That’s interesting to me, as it not only allows for lower noise and even higher dynamic range, but it also opens up Fuji’s DR200 and DR400 modes faster as well (IS0 160/320 rather than 200/400), meaning that there will be less noise in the shadows when using those modes. Fuji tends to be a little overly conservative with their native ISO ranges in their cameras according to my tests. What we will find is that the GFX100S II is completely usable at the end of the native ISO range of 12,800 (which is actually a little higher than typical due to the ISO range starting lower). I think this monochrome looks awesome – clean and bright despite being shot in natural light at ISO 12,800:
The pixel pitch of the GFX100S II is 3.76 microns, identical to the pixel pitch/density of the 62 MP Sony a7RV full frame sensor and the 26Mp APS-C sensors on Fuji’s 26MP APS-C sensors. A high number of pixels creates more visible noise, which on the Canon EOS 5DsR meant that by its ISO limit of 6400 it was a noisy mess. That’s clearly not the case here.
Here’s a look at the “still life” setup that I use for these tests and that crops will be displayed from:
There is only a minor uptick in visible noise and minimal loss of contrast at ISO 1250 (5 stops) when compared to base ISO.
Moving up several more stops brings us to ISO 5000, and you can see that while there is very slightly more pattern noise, the results look largely the same:
There’s some very mild inconsistency of pixel luminosity in the shadow areas, so contrast isn’t quite as high, but as you can
Going up another stop and a third to the native maximum value of 12,800 results in slightly rougher noise, but nothing significant.
You can see the shadows are raised a bit more, but things continue to look pretty clean overall. I actually really like the look of ISO 12,800 images in one of Fuji’s monochrome simulations. Images have a very film-like feel to them.
While I haven’t shown examples here, the expanded ISO range goes as low as ISO40 and as high as ISO 102400. Within the native range (80-12,800) there isn’t a value that I would personally hesitate to use, which is very impressive considering this is a 102MP camera! This is a camera that performs even in very low light conditions.
Dynamic Range
I like to use photonstophotos.com as a point of reference, and while they haven’t yet tested the GFX100S II’s sensor, they did test the same sensor in the GFX100 II and found that it was slightly better than the older GFX100S (12.55 vs 12.33 stops) which places it only behind the slightly larger sensors in the Hasselblad H6D-100c and and Phase 1 IQ3 and IQ4 models. For the money, you cannot find a better sensor than this. As with all Fuji cameras, you can actually improve this by using their DR200 and DR400 settings, which we’ll detail in just a moment.
Good dynamic range gives you tremendous flexibility for processing images. In the case below, a very strong backlighting meant that I had to choose between exposing for my subject or for the background. I chose the background, and then used the AI masking feature in Lightroom to grab my subject and increase the exposure and shadow recovery on him. The end result is nice and clean.
In this second example, you can see that I’ve both raised the shadows to uncover information there along with reducing highlights too allow the colors and details of the sky to emerge. I’m sure you can agree that the end result looks extremely nice.
Fujifilm has given us a lower base ISO in this new camera, so there should be just a little extra dynamic range available at ISO 80 vs the base ISO 0f 100 for previous cameras. In my particular tests, I establish a base line exposure at ISO 80 (1/9th of a second here), and then test in both directions by over or underexposing and then recovering the image in post. Eventually you reach a limit of how far the camera can go and still successfully recover the image.
When it comes to the shadows, that limit extends pretty far. I underexposed until my test subjects pretty much disappeared, but when I added that light back in post, the image popped right back out (recovered image on right):
Even zooming in 100% we can see that everything remains perfectly clean. The shadows are deep, the colors are neutral, and there is good contrast in the recovered textures. Very impressive.
You couldn’t ask for more than that. That means that you’ll have very few practical limits for recovering shadow information. Here’s another image where I’ve gotten a lot of information back from some shadowed areas in this image:
Definitely useful.
How about highlights? I find the overexposure limit is between 2 and 3 stops. In the comparison below you can see that the 2 stop recovery on the left is nice and clean, but if you look at the right side (3 stops) you’ll find that color information has been lost from the swatches and that some of the texture information has been blown out and is unrecoverable.
The image on the right is typically not going to be usable, so you’ll want to avoid that degree of overexposure. If you want more latitude in the highlights you can either underexpose a bit (shadows are easy to recover), or you can utilize Fuji’s DR200 and DR400 modes. If you shoot at a slightly higher ISO value (160), you can choose the DR200 mode, or at ISO 320 you can choose the DR400 mode. In DR200, camera will use electronic trickery to sample the shadow and midtone data from the current ISO setting (160+) while using the base ISO’s highlights, giving you an additional stop of DR. In DR400 the process is further exaggerated as the camera can then sample the highlights from two stops down, giving you two additional stops of DR. Using the DR200 technique, that same 3 stop shadow recovery that was unusable before looks considerably better:
Moving on to ISO 320 unlocks the DR400 mode. While the DR200 and DR400 results look similar on a global level, punching in to 100% shows that some of the texture information that was blown out in the DR200 result is visible in the DR400 result.
It also means that you could push into the 4 stop of overexposure range and get a similar result to our 2-stop overexposure at base DR results.
I wasn’t worried at all when for some reason this shot of flowers came out seriously overexposed for some reason. The amazing dynamic range makes it effortless to recover.
I always note that more dynamic range doesn’t always equal better images. Sometimes leaving a little mystery in the shadows adds a lot to an image, and often a blown out light coming through a window is preferable to seeing what’s outside.
Color
Fuji’s medium format cameras have long been a great platform for gorgeous colors, and that’s definitely true here. The larger pixels result in more gradations and subtleties in images, and images are just special.
Portrait colors are just so rich:
Pair that big sensor with a large aperture lens like the 55mm F1.7 lens that I used for this review and background will just melt away:
Bottom line is that there is no camera priced $5000 or less that will deliver better image quality than the sensor in the GFX100S II. Previously the cheapest you could get this sensor was in the $7500 GFX100 II, and it closely rivals the capabilities of even more expensive medium format options. I own a number of very fine full frame cameras, and I can always tell the difference when processing images from the GFX cameras (or at least those with the 100MP sensors). Check out more images in the image gallery to see more examples.
Conclusion
The Fujifilm GFX100S II might just be the one that tips those who have been straddling the fence on Fuji’s medium format over the edge. It has a number of areas where it is clear upgrade over the GFX100S, and yet costs a whopping $1000 less (which might be a first in camera history!) There are some clear areas where the GFX100 II is superior, but I feel like Fujifilm has done a tasteful job of delineating between the two models. The GFX100 II is the superior “jack of all trades” model, embracing some areas where medium format typically hasn’t gone. The GFX100S II is a more traditional GFX camera, so it isn’t quite as versatile for things like sports or video, but it packs both the focus system and sensor of the GFX100 II into a much more affordable package.
We’ve also got a new lens to dramatically increase the reach of the system in the GF 500mm F5.6. When combined with the 1.4x TC this gives a whopping 700mm of reach (or 553mm full frame equivalent), which now makes birding and wildlife more realistic options with the system. Here’s a 700mm shot:
I would sum up the potential decision for you like this: full frame cameras that arrive near the $5000 price tag of the GFX100S II will absolutely have better autofocus, faster burst rates, deeper buffers, and better video specs. There will probably be more lens options, too. But none of them can come close to the image quality afforded by the big sensor of the GFX100S II, and none of them can deliver such massive resolution. If you are a portrait, architecture, or landscape photographer who lives for ultimate image quality, now may be the time to take the plunge into the GF world. It’s a pretty special place.
Pros:
The best image quality you can get for $5000
Incredible resolution
Excellent dynamic range
Strong high ISO performance despite all those pixels
Strong, durable body with good weather sealing
Exceptional IBIS system I’ve ever seen
Improved autofocus
Excellent top screen
Viewfinder is very good
REALA Ace
LOVE the new grip texture
How often do you get an upgraded camera AND a $1000 price drop?
Cons:
Autofocus, though improved, remains the weakest area
Keywords: GFX, GFX100S II, GFX 100S II, 100S, II, 102MP, Fujifilm, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, Medium Format, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA #letthelightin, #DA, #Fujifilm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Fujifilm X100VI is the one that broke the internet.
We are living in an era where the proliferation of cameras in phones has meant that year over year sales of major camera brands is typically declining each year…until the X100VI. Excitement over this new camera has trigger scalping, hoarding, the necessity of lottery systems to determine who can buy one ahead of launch, and the general mayhem that comes with a “must have” item. So is this new Fujifilm X100VI worth the hype? Find out by watching my video review below…or keep reading.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review loaner of this camera. As always, this is a completely independent review, and the thoughts and opinions expressed here are my own.
So what is the X100 lineup? The X100VI is the latest iteration in a retro-inspired series that Fuji calls “premium compacts”. They are dial-based, analog style digital cameras with a fixed lens (a 23mm F2 lens that gives a roughly 35mm full frame equivalent angle of view). I’ve had to play a little personal catch-up, as while I have been reviewing Fuji products for about six years now, I’ve not actually used any of the previous iterations of the X100. On paper, I’m personally less interested in a camera with a fixed lens. It was the whole idea of interchangeable lenses that made me switch from a superzoom point and shoot to buying my first DSLR.
But there are also many, many photographers who crave the purity and simplicity of a camera with a fixed lens. These purists are more about the craft, the art of photography, and less about variety of gear. They like the idea of always having the same tool on hand and learning to use that tool exquisitely well. And frankly, I was pretty inspired by the work of someone like Jonas Rask and his take on the X100 series. The guy is an amazing photographer, and he helped me really appreciate the appeal of the X100VI. The Fujifilm X100 series is a purist’s camera, with a very vintage aesthetic that looks and handles more like some of my vintage SLRs than like many modern cameras.
I shared the camera around with some of my team, as while we were all aware of the hype surrounding the camera, none of us had ever used one. We all agreed that there was a bit of a learning curve. That’s not just coming from other camera brands, but even when coming from Fuji. I’ve reviewed 12 previous Fujifilm cameras, so I have a lot of familiarity with their menus (which is similar here) and their typical physical control scheme. But the X100VI has some things in different places than other Fuji cameras, so figuring out the control scheme took a bit for me (i.e. the shutter speed control ring has an outer ring that needs to be lifted up to control ISO, for example…which is NOT obvious!)
But Craig from my sister channel Let the Light in TV put it well: the longer he used the camera, the more he liked it. This is more than a bit of nostalgia; this is a highly capable imaging machine.
Spec List
Primary updates to the X100 formula:
40MP BSI CMOS Sensor
6 Stop IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization)
X Processor V – AI machine learning and trackable subjects
New film simulations (Reala ACE, Nostalgic Neg and Eterna Bleach Bypass) = 14 total
Ability to upload photos directly to cloud from camera
Up to 6.2K Video
AF Tracking in video mode
HEIF capture
Skin smoothing effect
White priority and Ambience Priority Auto WB modes
Custom AF zone areas
Option to limit available AF area types for AF-S or AF-C shooting
Pre-shot bursts (E-shutter + Cont H)
Self timer lamp on/off
Interval shooting with external timer
Interval priority mode (prioritizes chosen interval, irrespective of exposure time)
A big part of the excitement over the X100VI is over several huge feature upgrades. The two most significant is the transition from the 26MP X-Trans sensor found in the X-T4 to the 40MP X-Trans sensor found in the X-T5 and the inclusion of a new, miniaturized IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization) system that is rated for up to 6 stops of stabilization. This makes the camera more useful (in particular) for video capture, which has become increasingly important in this day of hybrid stills/video imaging. So let’s break down the camera down in greater detail.
Build and Features
The X100VI shares a lot of visual similarities to Leica’s M rangefinder bodies. They both have a squared, retro design that oozes hipster coolness. I would argue that a large part of the “gotta have it” desirability factor has to do with the fact that the X100 series is essentially a poor man’s Leica. There’s a lot of similar qualities, save that the X100VI retails for $1600 while the Leica M cameras typically cost more like $9000!
Look no further than Fuji’s own marketing:
“See. Frame. Create.
Enjoy photography in its purest form with Fujifilm’s X100 Series digital cameras. Using a timeless dial-based design, passed down from model to model, the stunning 6th-generation X100VI offers an indulgent, tactile image-making experience that delivers unforgettable content in every creative moment.”
It’s not often that I see the word “indulgent” used in camera marketing!
Yet it is true. There’s nothing here in terms of technology that isn’t available in other arguably more practical Fuji models, but like many other trendy items, it is the aesthetics and packaging here that make the X100 series so desirable. What’s ironic is that the throwback design with so many film-era cues isn’t really marketed to grizzled film-era photographers…all of the marketing has chiseled 20 something hipsters look stylish while taking photos with the X100VI.
Kudos to Fuji for crafting a beautiful bit of photography art. The machined aluminum frame looks great, with a grain that does remind me of my classic SLRs. This is set off by the vintage leather texture of the lower half of the camera.
The camera is also available in black, but I do love the look of Fuji’s silver finishes more, personally.
Unfortunately that stylish exterior does come at the cost of ergonomic practicality. There is a very slight bulge on the right side of the camera that serves as the grip, but there’s nowhere near enough depth there to actually wrap your fingers around. This is more a camera that you pinch rather than one that settles into your grip. The minimal height of the camera also means that my pinky has no place to go and has to float underneath the camera.
The tradeoff is that this is a very slim profile (aided by the pancake style lens) that will be very easy to bring along. The camera is 128.0mm in width (5″), 74.8mm in height (2.9″), and just 55.3mm in depth (2.2″). The weight is a little more substantial at 521g (1.1lb), though that is with the battery and memory card…and remember that this figure includes the weight of a lens because of the fixed lens.
The X100VI is an interesting mix of modern and retro. The retro portions have to do with the control schemes. We have a profusion of dial-based controls, though there are actually fewer actual dials than on a camera like the X-T5. On the front of the camera there is a standard wheel that is the typical control point for aperture or shutter speed.
But next to it is a an interesting control point that differs from any of the other Fuji cameras I’ve tested. There is a lever that surrounds a button (most resembling what you might typically see around a shutter button). That button can be depressed to open up a sub-menu of optional controls for the lever. By default it will switch between the optical viewfinder and the EVF (when rocked to the right), and, if in optical viewfinder mode, rocking it to the left will toggle between having a small EV-F overlay in the bottom right of the viewfinder. This has a magnified view of the focus area, which can be very useful for manual focus.
Yes, the X100VI does have a very rare optical viewfinder in a digital camera. This is a hybrid viewfinder system with three modes: fully electronic, fully optical and optical with an inset electronic display. There are a few complications with an optical viewfinder that is offset from the lens and sensor, but for the most part it is pretty nice to look through an optical viewfinder again, particularly when you layer in the electronic display. The EVF itself is mid-level – a 0.5″ display with 3.69 million dots of resolution and approximately 100% coverage. There is an easy to use diopter to the left of the viewfinder opening.
While I personally prefer a center viewfinder position, this is a nicer implementation than on, say, Sony’s cameras.
There are also a few controls on the lens itself. There are two protrusions close to the camera body that control aperture. The tight confines of that space might dictate that it is easier to control aperture from within the camera. You can set the aperture ring to “A” to enable camera control, though I had to fiddle around in the menus to get aperture control the way that I wanted. The settings didn’t quite function in the way I typically expect them to.
The aperture ring itself is clicked at one-third stop detents, and there is no declick option.
The manual focus ring of the lens also serves as a command ring when in autofocus modes. One option, for example, is to use it to utilize the “digital teleconverter” settings. The standard focal length is 35mm full frame equivalent, and the two digital teleconverter settings allow for a 50 and 70mm “zoom”, though what is really happening is just a digital cropping of the image. These crops will only show up in JPEGs, by the way, as I found that RAW images came into Lightroom uncropped even when I had used the digital teleconverter. Here’s how those crops affect the resolution.
35mm (23mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
50mm (35mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
70mm (50mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
Clearly this is a feature that only really works due to the higher resolution of the new sensor, as the crops from a 26MP sensor would end up being too low of resolution to work in a lot of applications. It would have been nice to get those RAW images with some of that crop information embedded in them, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
The ring itself moves very nicely, with a good level of damping. I found that manual focus had a fairly analog feel to it.
There is no lens release button on the front of the camera for obvious reasons.
What is present, oddly enough, is a little flash. It’s just a rectangular grid in the front of the camera (nothing pops up), which they can get away with because Fuji’s engineers could design around a fixed lens and its dimensions (though adding on one of the converter lenses will surely interfere with the flash dispersion pattern). This is not a powerful flash (unsurprisingly), rated at 24.3′ / 7.4 m at ISO 1600! I’m not a fan on on-board flashes because of the look of images taken with an on-board flash.
While playing with the flash settings in the Q menu, however, I did discover that the flash can be used as a commander for slave flash units, which could be useful.
On the left side of the camera is one of Fuji’s useful control points – an easy to use switch that controls the focus mode (Manual, Continuous, and Single Shot).
The top of the camera has a great looking retro aesthetic that also suffers from some retro ergonomic shortcomings.
Fuji’s shutter speed dials have always struck me as rather strange. It is hard to imagine a scenario where a modern photographer would prefer the imprecision of being able to choose only full stops of exposure rather (that’s what’s controllable here) rather than the much greater precision of the one third stops available through the typical command dials. That’s a lot of potentially under or overexposed images! It’s ironic that the largest dial on the camera is arguably the most useless.
Also strange is the implementation of the very clunky ISO controls visible through the little cutout on this wheel. It took me a bit to figure out how to access them, but I eventually discovered that I could pop up dial and twist it to control the ISO settings rather than the shutter speed settings. You then have to pop the dial back down, as there are no defined clicks or detents for ISO settings and it would be very easy to bump the dial and change the settings.
Weird.
It was actually quite frustrating during that process, as Fuji doesn’t really have much in terms of secondary ways to change those settings. On Canon cameras one has the option of just touching ISO on the touchscreen and making a quick change. On Sony you can assign it to a wheel or change it in the Q (Function) menu. You can’t do either of those things here, as ISO isn’t even an option in the Q menu and Fuji’s screens continue to have very limited touch control (and poor responsiveness). The workaround involved putting the ISO control dial setting to C (Command) and then setting up one of the dials to control ISO.
That section of the camera’s controls I would gladly replace. A typical mode dial would be much more useful to me.
Other controls here are more conventional and better for it. The Exposure Compensation dial is very welcome. There is a small programable button to the right of the shutter. The shutter is threaded in a typical Fuji fashion, and surrounding it is the ON/OFF toggle. You can choose either a mechanical style shutter with a 1/4000th shutter speed limit, or an electronic shutter that can reach a much higher 1/18,000th shutter speed. Fuji has a nice hybrid option where you can choose to use the mechanical shutter for slower shutter speeds (with all of the advantages that come with a mechanical shutter) and then automatically switch to the electronic shutter when faster shutter speeds are needed.
The back of the camera is a mix of normal and unexpected. The unexpected comes in the form of the drive button. It has the expected settings like the normal drive options (burst options, etc…), but really it functions more like a mode dial, including a wide variety of bracket options, HDR modes, panorama modes, and even access to movie mode.
It’s a different design than I’m accustomed to from Fuji. One interesting bracket mode I like is the ability to bracket film simulations. It seems to happen instantly, so only one shot feels like it is taken, but you’ve got three different film simulations recorded (for JPEG). You can obviously select which three film simulations you want bracketed. The RAW images arrive in Lightroom unchanged from each other, but JPEGs have the film simulations applied. In this case they are subtle because of the three simulations I chose, which include Provia, Astia, and Reala Ace (a new simulation I quite like).
It unfortunately does not appear that you can add customized presets to the bracketing options.
Other controls are more conventional, with a rear control wheel (which can be clicked for an additional function), a mini joystick, and a variety of buttons.
I’m less crazy about the position of the Q button, which is a very flush button right on the grip. It feels like there was a lot of room to place that button near the other buttons where it would be more easily accessible (and would allow for one hand operation).
Rounding out the back is a fairly large 3″ LCD with 1.62 million dots of resolution. It is a tilting (not articulating) screen that allows for a slightly bigger range of motion than before to allow for better tilting when shooting in a higher position. As noted earlier, there is some limited touch capacity, but little in terms of menu navigation (some touch in Q menu but not main menu) and lower reactiveness than competing models from other brands.
The right side of the camera holds the connection ports, including a combo mic input/remote shutter release port (3.5mm), a USB-C port for communications and charging, and a micro-HDMI port. I’m not a fan of micro-HDMI, but I understand that space is limited in a smaller camera like this so I’m more accepting of it.
The bottom of the camera shows the battery compartment, and there we find a few disappointing aspects of this design. The first is that the battery spec has not improved despite a more power hungry sensor and AF system. The NP-W126S is a relatively small 1260mAh unit that is rated for as much as 450 frames when using the OVF but drops to 310 frames in normal mode when using the EVF. That’s only about 45 minutes of 6.2K or 4K60 recording. You probably want to pick up a spare battery or two.
The second disappointment is that the memory card is housed there. I hate this position as it makes it far more likely that you’ll walk away without a memory card inserted because you have to close the battery door to set the camera down (happened to me!) If you have a tripod QR plate attached you also won’t be able to open the door to get at the card without removing it first. Even more surprising is the fact that the card slot is only UHS-1 compatible, which is really surprising to me when I consider that this is a camera with a 40MP sensor capable of shooting up to 20FPS and recording 6.2K video. That’s a lot of data that needs to pass through a fairly small pipeline (UHS-I is only capable of one third of the speed of UHS-II). I would have thought that at the least Fuji would have upgraded to the UHS-II standard to accommodate the larger data this camera needs to move.
As noted, this is the first of the X100 lineup to include IBIS. The miniaturized IBIS unit that Fuji has incorporated here is rated for up to 6 stops of stabilization. That’s a great addition to the formula here. In theory that should allow for handholding shutter speeds down to one second, though practically you will have limited success getting much of a keeper rate at one second. The greater value will be in the ability to get stable handheld video footage, and I did find IBIS effective for that. On the stills side, I was able to hit a roughly 25% keeper rate handholding shots at 0.5th of a second (five stops).
Accessories
Fujifilm is pretty specific that weather sealing for the camera requires using an adapter ring that adds filter threads and then using a filter to complete the seal.
This first involves unscrewing the metal flange at the end of the lens and exposing outer threads that allow accessories to be threaded on. I have a few objections to this process, however. First of all, clearly adding this filter ring and the filter itself completes the sealing for the lens (that’s the only place where protection is being added), which begs the question, “Why not just have a weather sealed lens?” Fuji has many lenses that come with a WR (weather resistant) designation, and none of them require a filter to complete the process. I’m personally not a big fan of using protection filters for the simple reason that you are adding another glass element, which never improves on the optical formula. It can create more flare issues, a slight softening effect, and if a person doesn’t invest in a very good filter, a more serious degradation of image quality.
The process is also a little clunky, requiring one to bring additional accessories along to complete the process. You can keep it all installed, obviously, but that does add more thickness to a camera that you’ve purchased in part for a slim profile. There is the risk of losing the metal flange that otherwise completes the look of the system. And if you don’t keep it installed, what happens when the weather turns unexpectedly sour (as it often does in spring when I’m doing this review). Doesn’t just having a weather sealed lens make more sense?
There’s also the reality of cost. The adapter ring and filter are not included. The AR-X100 adapter ring costs an additional $46, and their 49mm protection filter is an additional $49. Now, to be fair, you could use another brand of filter, but Fuji’s filter is available in the silver color that is the aesthetic match of the silver edition of the camera. I’m guessing that if you spent the money to get this stylish camera, you’re going to want a filter that matches. So that’s another $100 added to your bill if you want to have a weather sealed camera. Again, I have to ask: doesn’t just having a weather sealed lens make more sense?
There’s one final complication to this arrangement, though it will only affect those interested in using the converter lenses to give either a wider (28mm equivalent) or normal (50mm equivalent) angle of view. Both of these converter lenses need to thread onto the same threads as the filter adapter, so once again you will have the somewhat clunky process of threading off one attachment and threading another on.
I appreciate the fact that these accessories to do add some versatility to the camera, though, frankly, if you are going to this trouble and expense, you might as well invest in an X-T5 (my review here) and have access to a wide variety of lenses. If you’ve already invested in these converter lenses in the past, however, they continue to be compatible to this most recent X100 body.
Another accessory that remains compatible with the X100VI is the LC-X100V leather case (lower half shown above to highlight the throwback ethos). The case costs $80 USD, and offers both retro style and a good amount of protection when full employed.
No to harp on the weather sealing issue, but here we run into the flaw in the design. If you have the filter adapter and filter attached (to weatherseal the camera), the camera doesn’t quite fit. You can force it and make it work, but it was clearly designed with the bare camera in mind. This is one of the top user complaints, though a close second is that the design is in two pieces (top and bottom halves), and the two pieces don’t connect. This means that when you go to shoot, you essentially have to remove the top half, leaving a rather large and clunky piece in your hand(??) while you shoot one handed.
And this sums up the paradox of the physical design of the Fujifilm X100VI. What makes it so cool is its retro design, but almost all the design and ergonomic flaws can also be traced back to the retro design elements as well. I get a sense from X100 aficionados that the quirks are all part of the charm for them.
Autofocus Performance
The X100VI receives Fuji’s most recent autofocus improvements, which are almost all software rather than hardware based. The underlying hybrid Contrast/Phase Detect autofocus system that has undergirded Fuji’s cameras for the past few generations is still in place (and in need of an upgrade!), but it has been augmented in the most recent generation of cameras with Fuji’s X-Processor 5. This adds AI based deep learning for subject detection AF to accurately track a range of subjects. The system detects animals, birds, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, airplanes, trains, insects, and drones (though you choose “bird” to track insects and “airplane” to track drones). My experience with Fuji’s most recent autofocus in a variety of cameras is that the AF system definitely works best when there is a trackable subject in frame.
There are definite improvements here, though it should also be noted that Fuji’s AF systems continue to feel more primitive than those on the other platforms I test.
What’s unique here is that the AF system is designed around use with one lens, so the lens performance is central to the autofocus performance as a whole. That leads to a bit of a mixed bag. Fuji does not specify the type of focus motor in the 23mm F2 fixed lens mounted here, but the fact that they don’t tells me that it isn’t their higher end linear motor. Focus speed is reasonably good (not brilliantly fast, but not slow, either), but the quality of focus isn’t impressive. The focus motor has a bit of a “scratchy” feel and isn’t as quiet as better lenses. Focus precision is good, however, and I had no problem nailing narrow depth of field photos.
Focus was fine for street photography, which is almost certainly going to be primary application for the X100VI.
I did feel like there was somewhat of a “double-clutch” action to focus lock, where focus did a few micro-pulses before final lock. I read a lot of people gush over autofocus, but that tends to be in comparison to previous iterations of the X100. If you are upgrading from another X100 model, I’m sure you will find autofocus improved. But if you are viewing the autofocus performance in comparison to what market competition is at the moment, it is acceptably good but far from top tier.
I’m not sure this is the camera I would reach for for tracking action. The burst speeds are fine, with up to 11 FPS with the mechanical shutter or up to 20 FPS with the electronic shutter, though with a 1.29x crop). If you don’t want the crop, the max burst rate is 13 FPS with the electronic shutter. The problem is with the buffer depth. UHS-1 SD cards just can’t keep up with much of that kind of data, so if you are shooting uncompressed RAW, you can expect a maximum of about 17 shots before the buffer fills. Switching to lossless compressed RAWs gets you up into the mid twenties, fully compressed RAWs the mid 30s, and JPEGs will range from 80-146 shots depending on your speed. Here’s a breakdown of all the options.
This is fine for shooting off a quick burst to capture the key moment for street or concert photography, but the duration before the buffer fills won’t be sufficient for most sports situations. This isn’t really that kind of camera, so buy accordingly.
Video focus is also a mixed bag. Focus pulls are relatively smooth, but focus confidence isn’t high. There’s a bit of settling before focus lock, and the initial focus point isn’t always accurate until it does a minor readjustment. There is some moderate focus breathing.
When I did my hand test (where I alternately block the view of my face with my hand and then remove it), I found that sometimes focus wasn’t quite reactive enough to make those transitions in a timely fashion.
Expect focus to be best when there is a trackable subject in frame. Focus stays fairly sticky on the eye as I moved the camera around, and I didn’t see pulsing in static shots where focus needs to lock and stay still.
In general my autofocus experience was fairly standard for a Fuji review. It got the job done, but without as much sophistication as I often see on Canon or Sony. It was enough to capture the key moments in a wedding, like the groom giving a fist bump coming down the aisle.
Video Performance
Video is one of the key areas of improvement for the X100VI over the X100V. Video capture is now available up 6.2K internally at 30p in 4:2:2 10-bit color. 4K can be shot at 4K60 (allowing for smooth slowed footage). True slow motion can be achieved at up to 240FPS at full HD (1080P).
Here’s a list of all the various video modes available:
You will encounter various crop factors depending on your choice. 6.2K footage will have a 1.23x crop, while 4K60 will have a mild 1.14x crop. 4K30 will have the full sensor width.
Both FLog 2 and HLG recording are available, and of course all of Fuji’s film simulations and your custom tweaks can be made. I found that the IBIS system worked well for static shots, slow movements, but wasn’t enough to compensate for the choppy footage that comes from walking while filming. If you want that silky smooth moving footage, put the camera on a gimbal.
Footage generally looks good. I typically quite like the footage from Fuji cameras, and while the video options here aren’t as robust as my own personal X-H2 camera, the X100VI is now largely on par with the video options on the X-T5.
Image Quality
The X100 series has been upgraded to the “…high-resolution 40.2MP X-Trans CMOS 5 HR sensor has an enhanced image-processing algorithm that boosts resolution without compromising the signal-to-noise ratio“, delivering astonishing image quality.” (Fuji’s language as quoted in my X-T5 review). I’m very familiar with this sensor as it is the same sensor found in my X-H2. My general feelings on this sensor are positive, though I’ve found that it is absolute murder on lenses that are less than perfect. Fortunately Fuji doesn’t have to worry about multiple lenses standing up to this sensor…just one.
Fuji clearly felt that the existing 23mm F2 II lens was up to the task, and it largely is. This lens has an optical design of 8 elements in 6 groups, including two aspherical lenses. The sensor and lens are capable of producing detailed images.
I’ll give a brief breakdown of the lens performance as well as giving you the basic sensor performance (courtesy of my X-T5 review). There’s nothing new here in terms of the sensor itself; what’s new is its inclusion in this lineup of cameras.
Lens Performance
Fuji’s correction profiles are typically top notch, and that’s obviously going to be extra true of a camera where only one lens will be deployed. With corrections turned on, my text chart for Vignette and Distortion looks solid:
Pull back the electronic curtain and you’ll find a mild amount of pincushion distortion (-3) and a moderate amount of vignette (+57 to correct).
If you leave corrections on, you won’t see it. This is about an average performance.
I did see a bit of fringing around some window frames in a few of my video clips, but I would say in general longitudinal chromatic aberrations are pretty well controlled. You can see a bit of fringing on the edges of the various cameras here, but nothing that breaks the image.
I saw minor amounts of lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame, but those will be taken care of via corrections.
The big test here is whether or not this lens can handle the rigors of such a high resolution sensor. The new 40.2MP sensor is a whopping 53% higher in pixel count than the 26.16MP sensor on the previous generation X100V.
The 23mm F2 lens mounted on the X100VI isn’t a top tier lens, but it does quite well. I examine my test chart results at 200%, and I found that contrast was good in the center, with a dip to the midframe and more to the corners (pretty traditional sharpness profile). The ability to render fine details isn’t top tier, but not bad, either. Here’s my test chart that the crops will come from.
And here are F2 crops from across the frame:
This is a lens that really benefits from some stopping down. Contrast and detail is immensely boosted by stopping down from F2 to F2.8:
You can really see it in this real world shot (100% crop). The F2 frame looks a little low contrast, but the F3.6 shot really pops with contrast and detail:
In less demanding settings, however, I found that I was happy with the detail I saw at F2 even if contrast wasn’t off the charts.
On this high resolution sensor sharpness peaks at F5.6, though corners never really get really sharp. There’s a pretty marked difference between contrast/detail in the center vs the corners.
Starting at F8 there will be some mild regression due to the effects of diffraction (which arrives very early on such a high resolution APS-C sensor). That softening effect will magnify at F11 and be very obvious by F16 (minimum aperture).
Bokeh is okay…not great. Get up close and you can blur out backgrounds fairly well.
Back up just a little and the background can get a little busier.
The lens handles up close shots with a bit of sun coming into the frame pretty well, delivering fairly artful images.
If you want optical perfection, however, you probably are going to be looking elsewhere. This isn’t a $2000 lens, but rather a good enough lens that allows the camera to do its thing and help you create images you’ll love.
Converter Lenses
There are two options – a wide converter (WCL-X100II) and a telephoto converter lens (TCL-X100II) – both retailing for about $350 USD. We’ll start by taking a quick look at how they impact framing. The wide converter lens changes the effective focal length to 19mm, or roughly 28mm full frame equivalence:
Here’s the normal 23mm (35mm equivalent) framing from a tripod of the same scene.
And finally here is the 33mm (50mm equivalent) framing by adding the tele converter lens.
By utilizing the digital teleconverter you can get a variety of other framing options at varying resolutions.
WCL-X100II crop mode resolutions:
28mm (18mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
41mm (27mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
58mm (38mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
TCL-X100II crop mode resolutions:
50mm (35mm APSC) – 7728 x 5152 px – 40mp
72mm (48mm APSC) – 5472 x 3648 px – 20mp
100mm (66mm APSC) – 3888 x 2592 px – 10mp
Using either converter lens does come with some optical costs. Using the wide angle converter (19mm) results in some significant barrel distortion (+17) and much heavier vignette (+92 – nearly maxed out) to recover it.
The telephoto converter increases the pincushion distortion (-13) and has nearly as big of an impact on vignette (+90 to correct).
What’s more, there is a serious impact to contrast by adding the lens converters. Here’s a comparison of the bare lens vs with the wide converter attached at F2:
That’s true when stopped down, too. Here’s a mid-frame comparison at F4:
The impact isn’t as pronounced with the TCL-X100II, though the image is a bit softer.
Surprisingly, though, that’s not true when stopped down. At F4 I actually preferred the results with the TCL-X100II attached:
The TCL definitely beats the WCL for sharpness! Using these converter lenses definitely adds to your framing options here, but if you want a variety of framing options, wouldn’t you be better just buying a camera that would allow you to use different lenses? But if you just love the X100 concept, by all means, go crazy and accessorize!
Film Simulations and Color Science
Fuji has long been famous for their excellent film simulations. The most interesting thing here is the ability to really tweak each of these presets (or create your own recipes) and deliver very cool looking images right in camera. Fuji is pretty much a JPEG shooter’s dream, as you can tweak your recipes to get images you love right out of camera. RAW images with film simulations will arrive (as usual) flat in Lightroom, as you can easily apply any of 20 film simulations in post.
But the X100VI is unique in my experience in that if you create custom looks in camera, those will actually arrive intact in Lightroom even in RAW form, ensuring that you don’t lose the look you have created.
I absolutely love Fuji’s ACROS monochrome variations. They deliver sparkling B&W images.
Give me a nice moody scene and I’m in heaven.
I’m also very partial to one of the new simulations called “REALA ACE”. It has a really nice look that feels very usable and flexible for a variety of images.
Fuji’s color science remains a treat, and, used well, this is a camera that do very special things.
Dynamic Range
I value dynamic range within a camera in two specific areas: the ability to cleanly lift shadows without introducing noise or color banding and the ability to recover highlights without introducing “hot spots” where information has been permanently lost.
Having good dynamic range (particularly if you shoot RAW), allows you a lot more creative vision over how the final image will turn out, though it is always worth mentioning that just because you can raise shadows or reduce highlights it doesn’t always mean you should. Sometimes a photo with crushed shadows or blown out highlights is the better one.
Fuji has an extra trick up its sleeve to help you maximize dynamic range performance in such scenes, which we’ll get to in just a moment.
In my tests, I found that this sensor did an excellent job of recovering shadows very cleanly. Here we have an image that I purposefully underexposed by four stops. As you can see in the original RAW image, there is very little information left there. In post I added those four stops back into the recovered image. What we find is an image that has been recovered with very little penalty, whether viewed globally:
…or at a pixel level:
I could even recover shadows fairly cleanly at five stops, though you can see some additional noise has been introduced in the checkerboard pattern of the tabletop.
As is often the case, however, highlight recovery lags behind shadow recovery. Even at 3 stops of recovered highlights there is damage done to the image with both “hotspots” (information that cannot be recovered) and the loss of some colors in our swatches.
Sony is about a half-stop better in this regard, but Fuji has one other trick that I previously mentioned. If you move beyond the base ISO to either ISO 250 or 500 (and beyond), two new options open up in the menu. These are DR200 (available at ISO 250) and DR400 (available at ISO 400). What these do is essentially split the sensor readout so that the shadow information is gathered from the current ISO setting while the highlight information comes from base ISO. At ISO 250 that gives you one additional stop in the highlights (DR200), while at ISO 500 you gain two (DR400). This allows you to overexpose the image slightly so that you have plenty of information in the shadows, but since there is one or two stops less exposure in the highlights, you have plenty of ability to recover blown out areas in post. I also find that you retain better contrast even if you underexpose and recover using this method (here’s the DR400 recovered result at three stops of overexposure compared to the base ISO three-stop recovery):
Note how much more detailed and bright the right (DR400) recovery result looks. The shadow information looks the same on the two images (ISO 500 isn’t high enough to really introduce any additional noise), but the highlights are brighter and have much great fidelity. You’ll also note how much richer the colors are in the swatches by comparison. The better retention of highlights has vastly improved the overall contrast. I would pick the image on the right every time. It looks like a natural photograph despite the fairly radical recovery of highlights.
This is a technique well worth utilizing where needed, though I found that for the most part I did have enough dynamic range to edit as desired even at the base ISO.
Take this shot of a bridge. There is a bright sky and then deep shadow under the bridge. I have plenty of latitude for recovering the shadows over the bridge and even darkening the sky (not that there is a lot there!).
That’s a very useful amount of dynamic range, and if you need more, just use the DR200 or DR400 modes. It’s worth noting that due to the increased sensitivity in the ISO (base ISO of 125 vs 160) both of those are available earlier than they were previously, meaning that you can keep the noise down even more than on previous Fuji bodies.
On the video front we find that the X-T5 has Fuji’s F-LOG2 which boasts over 13 stops of dynamic range, meaning that you have more video dynamic range available than on previous models that only had the original F-LOG profile.
ISO Performance
Fuji tends to be a little more conservative with their native ISO range than other companies and resort to less marketing hype, though I frankly find the ISO performance to be ever bit as good as the best from Canon and Sony (the other brands I test). In this case the native range is expanded slightly, but on the bottom end, as the base ISO is now 125 rather than 160. The native limit is still 12,800, though expanded options at 25,600 and 51,200 are available. I didn’t really feel like there was much of a step back relative to the 26MP sensor despite the increased resolution, with images at ISO 6400 looking usable in real world situations.
At ISO 800 there is a mild addition of noise only detectable in the shadows. There isn’t a lot of difference from base ISO, however, and moving on to ISO 1600 shows little difference. At ISO 3200 there is slightly less contrast and slightly more noise, and that pattern continues at ISO 6400 and 12,800, where the noise becomes rougher and more visible in shadow areas. The first stop in the expanded range (25,600) looks about the same as what you would find on a Sony or Canon camera (where it is included in the native ISO range), with more visible noise and black levels that aren’t as deep due to “hot” pixels. ISO 51,200 should be be avoided, as image quality is several stops worse even though that is only one stop more. There’s a fair difference between ISO 3200 and 12,800:
Fuji says that the X-Trans sensor produces a more film-grain-like noise pattern, but it mostly looks like the pattern noise I see with most cameras. What is a strength, however, is color fidelity. I never really see a shift to greens or magenta as the ISO raises, nor do I see obvious banding in the shadow areas. Overall I’m impressed with the performance.
This real world image at ISO 12,800 looks perfectly useful to me.
Switch it to a monochrome where a bit of grain is desirable (Acros +R here) and you’ve got a great looking shot.
Resolution
The new 40.2MP sensor is a whopping 53% higher in pixel count than the 26.16MP sensor on the last few X100 bodies. That additional resolution has a lot of potential value, particularly when, as we’ve seen above, it doesn’t come with a lot of extra baggage in terms of reduced ISO performance. For portrait photographers, that high resolution means that you can take one portrait and get multiple different crops out of just one image.
The ability to deeply crop for street shots is very useful, as the original shot here seems to focus on the architecture:
While the cropped shot allows the walker to show up more prominently in the scene.
I’m having a hard time finding a downside to the resolution here, particularly when there is a Lossless Compressed RAW file option that keeps the file size down to a reasonable 40MB(ish) size, JPEGs are around 18MB, and if you want even smaller file sizes, you now can choose the HEIF image format which delivers 10-bit image quality in files up to 30% smaller than standard JPEGs. The fact that Fuji has managed to control keep ISO performance fairly similar to the 26MP level of the X100V helps eliminate a lot of the downside of the higher resolution. That resolution is going to be super helpful on a camera with a fixed lens.
Image Quality Summary
As I said in my intro, the allure of the X100VI is in its packaging and overall aesthetic. The focus system and sensor are essentially identical to what you’ll find in an X-T5. Fuji’s 40MP sensor is top dog in terms of raw resolution, their color science is excellent, but the true magic lies in the endless customization of their film simulations and the looks you can create in camera. Done right and you can create images that look almost as cool as the camera.
The actual lens is no better than average, but it gets the job done and doesn’t get in the way.
Conclusion
Almost certainly you will read more effusive reviews of the Fujifilm X100VI than this one, as I have tried to separate the hardware realities from the hipster “gotta-have-it” cool factor of the camera package. Having spent some time with the X100VI, I can understand the attraction, and I’m personally all in favor of anything that drives attention to the shrinking camera market.
The true magic of the X100VI is in the packaging. It is more than the sum of its parts, as when I break down the hardware, autofocus, and optical performance, there is nothing really exceptional here. But yet there’s also an undeniable pleasurable feeling of carrying this little camera around making magic with it.
Who knows how long it will be until the Fujifilm X100VI is readily available, but there’s no question that Fuji has managed to get the photography world’s attention with this upgraded premium compact camera. I hope you manage to get one…and hopefully you will feel the “indulgent” vibe that Fuji wants you to feel.
Pros:
Top of the heap for desirability
Very cool aesthetic
Serious improvements to the series in the X100VI
40MP sensor upgrade allows for more framing/cropping versatility
Inclusion of IBIS is fantastic
New film simulations are useful
AI Tracking upgrade
Huge video spec upgrade
Remains compatible with accessories from previous generation
Keywords: Fujifilm, X100VI, X100, VI, Fuji X100VI Review, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, XF, 40MP, 40 MP, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, 26MP, 26 MP, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA #letthelightin, #DA, #Fujifilm
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fuji’s move to the 40MP resolution point on some of their higher end cameras has been pretty punishing on many of their existing lenses, but it also really makes it clear which lenses are exceptional. I reviewed one such lens earlier this year in the form of the XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR, and immediately people began to tell me that I needed to try out the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR as well, as it was even better. Well, they were right; this lens is awesome! It’s a clear and easy choice for those looking for a premium prime lens covering the classic 35mm angle of view (23mm is 34.5mm in full frame equivalence due to Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor). The XF 23mm has been out for roughly a year and a half now, but it feels like it was made for these new high resolution bodies. This is an easy lens to produce lovely photos with.
Fuji has opened up their platform to third party lenses, and there are a number of lenses that look pretty much identical on paper, but aren’t in practice. This includes a Tokina ATX-M 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD), Viltrox 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD, and the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN that is rumored to soon be coming in Fuji X-mount ($549 USD). The Sigma, in many ways, will prove the most competitive (based on my findings with the Sony E-mount version), but I think there are still a number of ways where the Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is operating on its own level. It’s got solid features, great autofocus, and gorgeous optics.
But that does come at a cost. The Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR retails for $899, which means that you are going to pay for that goodness. If we were all made of money, we would all choose the absolute best gear regardless of cost, but in the real world the reality of a lens costing hundreds of dollars more than the competition is going to be a factor. My review will remember that tension that you, as the consumer, have to deal with as a part of my assessment.
So should you add one to your kit? We’ll try to answer that question in this review. If you would prefer to watch your reviews, you can choose watch my definitive video review below…or just keep reading.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for loaning me the 23mm F1.4. I’ll be doing this review on my X-H2, which I reviewed here. As always, this is a completely independent review and my conclusions are my own.
Fuji XF 23mm Build and Handling
Fuji likes to essentially build the feature list of their lenses right into the name, so if you learn to “speak Fuji” you can quickly get a sense of what a lens does and does not have right from the name. In this case, the name includes R, LM, and WR, which is a robust feature set.
R = Ring, or specifically an aperture ring.
LM = Linear Motor, Fuji’s premium focus system
WR = Weather Resistance
That adds up to a fairly premium lens despite the compact size of the lens. This lens is slightly larger and heavier than the previous generation 23mm F1.4, but the tradeoff is that it is better at everything. The Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is pretty much identical to the 33mm F1.4, having very pleasing proportions that look very nice when mounted on the camera.
Now, to be fair, I tested both of these lenses on one of Fuji’s largest APS-C bodies – the X-H2, so if you are using one the very small bodies and want to travel as light as possible, there are smaller/lighter alternatives (the XF 23mm F2, for example). To me, however, this is a great size lens on the X-H2.
The dimensions of the XF 23mm F1.4 are 2.6 (D) x 3.1″ (L) / 67 x 77.8mm with a 58mm front filter thread size. The weight is a very moderate 13.2 oz or 375g. That makes the 23mm very slightly larger and heavier than the 33mm, but barely; it is just a few millimeters longer and about 5 grams heavier. As with the 33mm options, the two competing lenses from Viltrox and Tokina are identical in their own proportions and specifications. Both are 2.6 x 2.8″ (65 x 72mm) though the Viltrox weighs in at 260g while the Tokina is slightly heavier at 276g. But there’s more – they both have the same optical design (11 elements in 10 groups) and the same MFD (30cm) and maximum magnification (0.10x). Same filter thread size (52mm) and same number of aperture blades (9). That’s weirdly similar. The Sigma (in Sony form) is more unique at 65.8 x 79.2mm and 330g in weight, making it the most similar to the Fuji. Here’s a look at a comparison chart between the for lenses:
Bottom line is that while the Fuji is the heaviest of this group, it is also the best made, has full weather sealing, and has a slightly larger/more robust linear focus motor. The weight is still very light and I found the camera and lens effortless to carry around even without a strap for hours while exploring the Notre Dame campus in South Bend, Indiana.
The aperture ring is the Fuji standard. It moves nicely with defined detents at the one third stop marks and with markings at the full stops (F1.4. F2, F2.8, etc…). Rotate the lens all the way to the right and click the little button on the ring if you want to move into A (automatic) mode and control aperture from within the camera.
The manual focus ring works fairly well. I could focus with fairly good precision and didn’t notice visible stepping despite being a focus by wire system.
The Fuji XF 23mm is a very nicely made lens despite its light weight. It feels very “metal” and dense. The lens has a classic semi-glass black finish to it and is completed with thorough weather sealing (as already noted) that has a rear gasket and internal seals.
The included lens hood is is made of plastic but feels more substantial than the one on the 33mm that I tested.
There are no switches on the barrel, as AF/MF is handled via a lever/button on Fuji camera bodies. But many other lensmakers are including things like a focus hold button and/or declick option in lenses in this price zone, and it feels like the standard has been raised and Fuji isn’t quite meeting it. There is also no lens based optical stabilization. I used the X-H2 for this review, which has good in-camera-image-stabilization, so I didn’t actually miss it, but if you are shooting with an older camera, you might.
There are nine rounded aperture blades and I felt like the aperture did quite a good job of retaining a circular shape when stopped down. Here’s a look at the geometry at F1.4, F2, and F2.8:
There is significant lag in the aperture when trying to do aperture racking for video (already difficult because of the clicks) along with visible “steps”. There will be no smooth opening and closing of aperture for an aperture rack.
The minimum focus distance is 19cm, which allows for a reasonably high 0.20x, which is the best amongst these competing lenses (Viltrox and Tokina have 0.10x and the Sigma has about 0.14x). Here’s a look at MFD:
Up close performance is good, and this real world shot shows both the magnification level and the detail available.
Contrast certainly isn’t at macro level, but there’s enough detail there to make up close shots with strongly blurred backgrounds a definite strength.
Overall, the build and features of the lens are very nice, and, as noted in the intro, the compact nature of the lens makes it easy to bring along.
Fujinon XF 23mm Autofocus Performance
The Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 Macro is equipped with a linear focus motor, and that motor does the job of moving focus quickly and smoothly. It was also very accurate on my X-H2, which gave me more confidence using it than I typically feel when using Fuji. I really felt like I could rely on getting accurate autofocus in a wide variety of situations. I was a guest at a wedding, and when the bride and groom came through the door I only had a quick moment to turn and take a shot. They were backlit, there were about 10 rows of people between me and them, and I shot at F1.4. Autofocus was accurate despite all these factors.
General portrait work was very good, with consistently accurate focus.
Autofocus up close was good as well, allowing for lovely close shots:
Focus was quiet and quick, allowing me to grab shots even during action, like on the golf course.
As odd as it may seem, I was also relieved to see good focus at smaller apertures, like for landscapes or architecture. Sometimes lenses focus fine at wide apertures, but not at smaller apertures.
The XF 23mm F1.4 was also quite good for video work, though I continue to see a few Fuji quirks. Focus pulls were good, with no visible steps. Focus breathing is extremely low, which helps focus transitions look very smooth. But on the negative side, touching a new focus area on the screen doesn’t always produce a reaction, or sometimes the move to focus to a new area is delayed. I think that is largely on Fuji’s focus system and touchscreens, which just aren’t as responsive as some competing brands, but there is clearly the potential in the lens for strong performance for video.
When doing my hand test (blocking focus on my face with my hand and then removing it to allow focus to return to the eye), I saw mixed results. The problem was never focus on my face, but rather sometimes the focus system didn’t move to my hand. It would focus on the background beyond me instead. Bottom line: there’s still room for improvement on the video AF front for Fuji, but I actually don’t think that the lens is the problem.
Autofocus was definitely better than average, however, so I’m satisfied. Most of the time focus very – ahem – sweet:
This is the kind of lens I would want to have on my Fuji camera in critical focus situations.
Fuji XF 23mm Image Quality Breakdown
The Fuji XF 23mm has a complex optical formula of 15 elements in 10 groups, which includes 2 aspherical and 3 ED elements – essentially an identical optical design to the 33mm. The MTF chart shows very sharp center performance, a dip in the midframe, and then a minor correction where the edges of the frame are slightly sharper.
It’s worth noting that Fuji displays their MTF charts at higher values than usual. Most MTF charts use 10 and 30 lines/mm, but Fuji shows their MTF charts at 15 and 45 lines/mm. That’s actually useful since the release of their 40MP sensors, as the more demanding MTF chart (at 45 l/mm) is a more accurate representation of how lenses will perform on a high resolution body. As noted in the intro, I feel like the XF 23mm F1.4 has joined a very short list of lenses that I feel really thrive on the 40MP cameras.
Fuji’s correction profiles are typically quite good, but I’ll turn them off to take a look at the actual lens performance when it comes to vignette and distortion.
We can see that there is some barrel distortion and fairly heavy vignette present. If I do a manual correction I find that the distortion pattern is quite linear and is corrected with a value +13. The vignette is heavy, requiring a +81 to clear it up (about 3 stops). The correction profile does all of this easily either in camera for JPEG/Video or in software for RAW files.
Nothing too troubling here. How about chromatic aberrations? First of all, nothing jumped out at me in real world testing. When I went looking for longitudinal chromatic aberrations, I really could not find much of anything. Bokeh highlights were neutral, and there was little fringing to be seen. In this shot I don’t see any fringing either in the crystals or in the bokeh highlights beyond.
I saw next to no lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame either on my chart in on bare branches in real world shots, so nothing to worry about on that front.
Here’s a look at my test chart that the crops came from (40MP images from the X-H2):
Here’s a look at F1.4 crops (about 175% magnification) from the center, mid-frame, and corner:
The XF 23mm F1.4 has more consistent sharpness, contrast, and detail across the frame than the 33mm did, making it one the sharpest Fuji prime lenses that I’ve yet tested. The results look very much like a good lens on one of the full frame platforms that I test, which is, frankly, very unusual on APS-C. I was very pleased to get high contrast, detailed results even at F1.4:
That’s very big deal when you are talking about this level of resolution. A full frame camera would have to be roughly 91MP to have a similar level of pixel density, so the XF 23mm F1.4 is being held to a higher standard in these tests than on any other platforms, and the fact that a compact lens is succeeding so well under these demands is very impressive. Don’t expect anywhere near this level of performance from the Viltrox or Tokina 23mm F1.4 lenses. I don’t have either of them on hand to compare to, but when I looked back on my review of the Viltrox, it didn’t deliver as good of results on Sony even though I tested it on just an 18MP resolution point. The Sigma will likely be the strongest competitor based on my Sony E-mount test, and I’ll revisit this comparison when I do a review on X-mount.
Even a mild stop down to F1.8 produces improved contrast across the frame and brighter corners.
Stopping the lens down to F2 adds a bit more contrast in the mid-frame and corner, with the center mostly staying the same. Stopping on down to F2.8 improves contrast and clarity to fantastic levels across the frame.
Real world images in this range are crisp and detailed all across the frame (this shot at F2.8):
The importance of this cannot be overstated, particularly if you are looking for lenses that are a good match for a high resolution body. Diffraction comes early on high resolution cameras, so being able to get your best results at wider apertures is really important. High resolution bodies also tend to be noisier at high ISO values, so the ability to get crisp results at large apertures allows one to keep the ISO down in lower light situations and get clean results. The XF 23mm F1.4 is one of the best pairings for Fuji’s 40MP sensors that I’ve yet reviewed.
At landscape apertures there is plenty of detail across the frame. Couple that with Fuji’s excellent color rendition, and you have a lens very well suited for landscape work:
Diffraction sets in pretty early on my X-H2, so by F8 images are starting to soften slightly, and by F16 the effect is very pronounced. On the new higher resolution bodies with the 40MP sensor, I would try to stay at F8 or larger as much as possible.
The 23mm is clearly sharper than the 33mm, but I would give the edge to the 33mm for the quality of the bokeh. It’s not unusual for the lens with wider focal lengths to be less “creamy” in the bokeh region than longer focal lengths. This shot of the morning dew shows what I would consider the biggest “bokeh issue” for the lens – it has more outlining than what I would like to see.
When you arrived at strongly defocused backgrounds (look at the upper portion of the image below), the bokeh looks quite good. But in the early transition to defocus there are still some harder edges.
You can see it here in this shot of votive candles: the defocused region is only okay, certainly not exceptional.
One final image to illustrate the point – this shot of an ornate stair rail shows a lot of outlined circles in the defocused regions; you certainly couldn’t classify it as “soft”.
This is often the Achille’s heel for very sharp, high contrast lenses. It’s hard to turn that contrast off in the defocused area. It’s a rare lens that can combine both intense contrast and sharpness with very soft and creamy defocused areas, so often lens designers have to look for some compromise between the two. The XF 23mm F1.4 is biased towards the sharpness side of the equation.
This isn’t to say the bokeh is bad (it’s not), but it’s just a little busier than I personally would like. When at its best the XF 23mm F1.4 delivers images that have great detail on the subject and fairly nice rendering in the background.
This image is a good segway into a discussion of flare resistance. You can see from the upper right portion of the image above that there was bright sunlight coming into the frame, and yet contrast has held up. There’s a hint of an artistic veiling effect that shows up a little more strongly in this image here:
I’m actually very partial to this effect, as it can add an artistic effect to images. In fact, one of my favorite images from the wedding I (casually) shot with this lens was this “getaway” image of the bride and groom where I intentionally got low to get some flare effectives in the image. Contrast is strong in the image, but there is a very nice sunstar effect. There is a moderate ghosting artifact near the bottom of the frame, but nothing too heinous.
I was very pleased with the look of the sunbursts from the lens. They are nicely defined with blades that end in points.
Color rendition is typically a strength for Fuji glass, and I think that’s true here. Color are rich, nicely saturated, and images have a pleasing “pop” to them.
Here’s another shot of an interior space that shows nice color rendition.
Skin tones were also very nice. I would consider this a great option for wedding photographers for a lot of the reasons I’ve already mentioned.
Fuji’s transition to the very high resolution point on some of their recent cameras has prompted my own move to the X-H2 as my Fuji camera and test body. I’ve quickly discovered that a 40MP APS-C sensor really changes the calculus of what lenses are going to be acceptable to someone who looks critically at lenses for a living. I’ve been left disappointed by a number of lenses that just don’t seem to ever get quite sharp enough to resolve this sensor, so a lens like the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR is a breath of fresh air. It makes my X-H2 essentially the equivalent of a full frame camera, with great detail and autofocus, but with a smaller, lighter form factor than what most full frame lenses can compare to. I love my Sony FE 35mm F1.4 G Master lens, and have marveled at how compact it is (for what it is), but there’s no arguing the fact that it is 50% bigger and heavier than this XF 23mm F1.4. That is the (potential) advantage of APS-C, and it is nice to see it realized here.
A lens like this is a great option in lower light or at night, as you can shoot with confidence at large apertures and still get crisp, detailed results.
Autofocus performance was also a clear cut above older Fuji lenses, and, while Fuji still has a ways to go to quite match what Sony and Canon are doing, the gap seems to be closing a bit. If you have purchased or are considering purchasing an X-H2 or X-T5 (or some future body with the 40MP sensor), then I can recommend the XF 23mm F1.4 to the short list of lenses that have high enough performance to thrive on that platform. At the same time, the price tag of $899 USD is not cheap, so a lens like the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN might become the next best thing if you can’t afford the Fuji. I can also say, with confidence, that the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR is the best lens you can get at this focal length in X-mount.
Pros:
Well made lens in a compact package
Good build and weather sealing
Linear motor is quiet and fast
Good stickiness on eyes during focus
Focus pulls are smoothly damped
Very low focus breathing
Good sharpness across the frame from F1.4 on
Low levels of chromatic aberrations
Beautiful color rendition
Cons:
No declick option or physical controls other than aperture ring
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Fuji’s move to the 40MP resolution point on some of their higher end cameras has been pretty punishing on many of their existing lenses, but it also really makes it clear which lenses are exceptional. I reviewed one such lens earlier this year in the form of the XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR, and immediately people began to tell me that I needed to try out the Fujinon XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR as well, as it was even better. Well, they were right; this lens is awesome! It’s a clear and easy choice for those looking for a premium prime lens covering the classic 35mm angle of view (23mm is 34.5mm in full frame equivalence due to Fuji’s 1.5x crop factor). The XF 23mm has been out for roughly a year and a half now, but it feels like it was made for these new high resolution bodies. This is an easy lens to produce lovely photos with.
Fuji has opened up their platform to third party lenses, and there are a number of lenses that look pretty much identical on paper, but aren’t in practice. This includes a Tokina ATX-M 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD), Viltrox 23mm F1.4 ($299 USD, and the Sigma 23mm F1.4 DN that is rumored to soon be coming in Fuji X-mount ($549 USD). The Sigma, in many ways, will prove the most competitive (based on my findings with the Sony E-mount version), but I think there are still a number of ways where the Fuji XF 23mm F1.4 is operating on its own level. It’s got solid features, great autofocus, and gorgeous optics.
But that does come at a cost. The Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R LM WR retails for $899, which means that you are going to pay for that goodness. If we were all made of money, we would all choose the absolute best gear regardless of cost, but in the real world the reality of a lens costing hundreds of dollars more than the competition is going to be a factor. My review will remember that tension that you, as the consumer, have to deal with as a part of my assessment.
So should you add one to your kit? We’ll try to answer that question in this review. If you want more information, you can choose to watch my definitive video review or read the text review…or just enjoy the photos below.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for loaning me the 23mm F1.4. I’ll be doing this review on my X-H2, which I reviewed here. As always, this is a completely independent review and my conclusions are my own.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Fujifilm X-S10 was one of my favorite Fuji cameras of the previous generation. I gave it a positive review when it was released roughly 2.5 years ago as I liked the balance of bringing some of the best features of the X-T series into a smaller, cheaper package. A lot of Fuji cameras occupy the premium end of the APS-C space, and the X-S10 provided a strong camera at the roughly $1000 USD price point that largely had superior specs to alternatives from other brands. The Fujifilm X-S20 is the successor to the X-S10, and, as always, there’s some pros and cons. On the plus side, there are a number of core improvements (particularly on the video side), but, in the negative column there is a jump in price from the $1000 range up to $1300. There was nearly a $700 gap between the X-S10 and the X-T4; the gap between the X-S20 and the X-T5 is only $400, which will certainly leave a few buyers strongly considering that camera instead.
The X-T5 received the higher resolution sensor of the X-H2 (40.2 MP) while the X-S20 carries on with the older 26MP X-Trans BSI-CMOS sensor found in a number of other Fuji cameras. This might be part of Fuji’s market strategy, however, as not everyone needs (or wants) the higher resolution point.
The X-S10 was a bit more revolutionary than the X-S20 as it was the first of Fuji’s lower priced models to get features like IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization), the 26MP X-Trans sensor, faster burst rates, and a fully articulating LCD screen. The X-S20 is more evolutionary than revolutionary with more subtle improvements. A lot of the core features remain the same:
26.1MP BSI X-Trans IV CMOS sensor
ISO 160 to 12800 (80 to 51200 extended)
Hybrid AF system (117 contrast / 425 Phase Detect points)
Up to 20fps continuous shooting with electronic shutter (30fps with 1.25x crop)
1/4000th second max. shutter speed (1/32,000th using the electronic shutter)
0.39-in OLED EVF with 0.62x magnification, 100Hz
Similar Dimensions (the X-S20 is 1.7mm wider and 26g heavier)
Single SD card slot
Key improvements include:
Larger NP-W235 battery (from higher end models) that nearly doubles shots and video record time
Deep AI learning autofocus tracking (similar to X-T5 and X-H2)
Newer/faster X-Processor 5
Slightly improved IBIS
Up to 6.2K video and 4K60 options
Improved LCD resolution
Card slot now supports UHS-II
Deeper buffer
Can be used as a webcam via the USB-C port
When you add all of these up it equals an improved camera in a number of key areas, but there really isn’t a lot of new features that jump off the page. This is a pretty common trend in camera development, in my experience, as while some generations really push the envelope for new features, the next generation is often where those features are refined and the camera matures. In short, it’s in that second generation that things start to work as they should! The challenge here is that Fuji has elected to do a significant price increase on the cycle where there isn’t a lot of headline new features or upgrades. Will that present a marketing challenge? Will the X-S20 be as successful at $1300 as the X-S10 was at $1000? That remains to be seen.
For those that want a smaller, lighter, simpler camera that has many similar features to the higher end Fujifilm X-T5 (my review here), the X-S20 offers a compelling package. It has solid autofocus, competitive buffer depth, long lasting battery life, and very good image quality. It also happens to be quite a little video powerhouse, as we’ll see. It also comes at a great time for the Fuji ecosystem, as Fuji’s opening up to third party lenses has opened a floodgate of new development from Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Viltrox, and more. I’ll use a few of those new lenses in this review, including the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 RXD and the Viltrox Pro AF 75mm F1.2. I’ve also got some interesting new lenses on hand from Fuji, including the new XF 8mm F3.5 wide angle lens and the XF 18-120mm F4. I’ll also throw in a few shots from the extremely inexpensive XC 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ kit lens. The question to be answered is if the X-S20 ends up feeling “worth the money” relative to Fuji’s alternative offerings. I’ll do my best to answer that in this review. If you would prefer to watch your reviews, you can check out my definitive video review instead.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review sample of the X-S20 and some lenses. As always, this is a completely independent review. All conclusions are my own.
Fuji X-S20 Build, Handling, and Features
The X-S20 continues the trend of taking a number of high end features from the X-T series and packing them into a considerably smaller body. The X-H2 is fairly large – pretty much equivalent to a full frame camera, and the X-T5 is smaller and slimmer, but the X-S20 feels very compact in something akin to the Sony a6600. It measures in at: Width: 127.7mm (5″) | Height: 85.1mm (3.4″) | Depth: 65.4mm (2.6″). The grip is fairly deep, though as always with shorter cameras like this I feel like I have no place to put my pinky finger because of the relatively low height.
The weight is still quite light at 491g (1.1lb) with memory card and battery, or 410g (0.9lb) without. The X-S10 weighed 465g with battery and memory card, but that’s a little deceptive as the battery was so much smaller. The bare camera weighed 415g, or 5g more than the X-S20. Fuji has actually managed to keep the weight quite low despite the camera being very slightly wider than its predecessor.
My only other grip complaint (outside of having no place for my pinky!) is when using larger lenses. I noticed when using the Viltrox Pro AF 75mm F1.2 that the deep grip combined with a wider lens made for a close fit for my fingers between the lens barrel and the grip of the camera. I had a recent injury to one of those fingers and it is still a bit sensitive, so I noticed more than I might ordinarily.
Viewed from the front, the X-S20 has a classic Fuji camera profile, though conspicuously missing is my favorite little control level for choosing between M/S/C (Manual, Single Shot, Continuous).
It remains a curious omission, as some lower priced cameras have it. I find this control particularly important on Fuji bodies as Fuji lenses themselves almost never have an AF/MF switch, so that lever is the simplest, most direct way to enable MF. I had to go into menus to choose MF, which is obviously a slower process.
While I’m griping, I’ll detail my other main handling complaint. Like the X-S10 before it, the X-S20 has only a single SD slot that is located down in the battery compartment on the bottom of the camera. That location means that if you ever work from a tripod (for video or stills) and mount a quick-release plate, you almost always have to remove or at least loosen the QR plate so it can be moved out of the way to access the battery compartment and memory card.
It may seem like a minor thing, but as someone who does major projects where I’m collecting a lot of video and stills for reviews, this gets really annoying. I MUCH prefer a memory card location on the side of the camera. The higher end X-T cameras have two card slots and a memory card compartment on the side.
As noted, the battery is improved from the lower end NP-W126S Rechargeable Lithium-Ion, 8.4 VDC, 1260 mAh unit that is rated for 325 Shots to the much better, much larger NP-W325 unit found on Fuji’s higher end cameras. The NP-W325 is a 2200 mAh battery and is rated for 750 shots here, or more than double the rating of the previous battery pack. It also means that video recording time as related to battery life is vastly improved as well – expect to get around 2 hours of record time on a charge. This is one the biggest practical improvements to the camera (and an issue that I harped on for the X-S10, as there was clearly room in the grip design for the larger battery. The grip is the exact same size on the X-S20).
Though small and compact, the build materials on the X-S20 are excellent. It is built from the same premium magnesium alloy we see on higher end cameras.
This promises to make the camera more durable and professional grade, though that is counterbalanced by the reality that there is no weather-sealing in the camera body.
Sigh.
The realities of mid-level cameras, where you are sometimes delighted by what’s there and then frustrated by what is not.
On the positive note of what is here, we have a great 3″ fully articulating touchscreen that has been upgraded to a higher 1.84 million dot resolution. I love an articulating LCD as it allows for front monitoring and also more flexibility in the camera position and angle of shots.
This can really make a difference when in front of the camera, as it gives you visual feedback on framing and if something goes wrong (like a dead battery)!
Fuji’s touch capacity has not changed (or improved) over the three generations of cameras that I have now tested. It used to be that Fuji was at least better than Sony, but Sony has finally improved on this aspect and their recent cameras are fully navigable by touch. Fuji allows you to select focus areas, touch to capture, and to navigate the Q (quick) menu, but no navigation of main menus and there is noticeable input lag when compared to the better response of competitors. It’s time for some serious improvement to the touch capacity of Fuji cameras, as they have fully fallen behind in this area.
Speaking of that Q menu…
On the X-T30, the Q button was placed right on the thumb rest area, a serious ergonomic faux pas, so Fuji has wisely relocated the Q button from there. The new position (on top of the camera) works fine, though it won’t be intuitive for anyone who has used just about any other camera, well, ever. Every Q menu button I’ve previously seen has been located on the back of the camera, so it will take a while before you instinctively reach for it there.
There is also a dedicated ISO button there, which I certainly approve of.
You’ll also note that instead of the traditional Fujifilm control scheme found the X-T series that leverages retro-style dials for ISO, shutter, and exposure compensation, Fuji has opted for a more generic set of controls. This includes a mode dial similar to what you would see in many cameras and then front and rear dials to control things like shutter, aperture, or exposure compensation.
This more standard scheme feels a lot less “Fuji”, but will probably also make the X-S20 feel more accessible to those unfamiliar with the Fuji way of doing things and will probably also serve to make the camera less intimidating to those photographers put off by the more analog approach Fuji has taken in the past. Everything works fine, however, and in many ways this is a better ergonomic setup than what is found on the Sony a6xxx series. There is one addition to the mode dial, and that is a dedicated VLOG position. The VLOG position takes you into a video mode, but with additional options available. This includes a self-timer (countdown to the start of the video), direct link to the Face/Eye detect settings, a “product priority” focus mode (rather than focusing solely on the face of the presenter it will prioritize a product when it enters the frame), IBIS control, High Speed recording options, and a “Background Defocus” mode (which sets the lens to the maximum aperture to create a more defocused background).
I still don’t like the shutter button as well as some of other Fuji lineups. The shutter is almost slightly recessed in the housing, which requires you to depress it by shaping your finger a bit. This will certain be exacerbated in cold weather when I’m wearing gloves. That same observation also applies to the video record button located by the shutter button, which is very small and sits flush with the top of camera. Both of these buttons would be more useful if they were raised a bit and easier to find by touch.
The rear of the camera has a small joystick that helps navigation and selecting a focus point along with the standard compliment of buttons that one would expect to find back there.
The left side of the camera has three ports in two compartments. The top port is a clean, compact microphone input slotted nice and high that can also be used as a remote shutter release port. A dialogue on the LCD screen smartly pops up when you plug into the port asking if you want to select something other than a microphone input (a remote release cable, for example). You can jump directly into those menu settings if desired, or it will go away in a few seconds if you don’t want to change anything.
The second compartment has a micro-HDMI port along with a USB-C multipurpose port. The USB-C port can be used either for data transfer or charging.
The top left side of the camera has a lever that will pop up the built-in flash, which has a 16.4′ (5 m) at ISO 100 guide number. Not particularly powerful, but useful in a pinch if you use it right. In most situations you’ll probably be better off avoiding using that flash, as it rarely produces flattering results. There’s a reason most pro cameras come without a built in flash.
There’s also a dial there that is set by default to toggling through various film simulations. This is a bigger deal on Fuji cameras than most other systems as they have more varied (and often better) simulations that can really give you a certain “look” for your JPEGs in camera. It’s particularly handy for those that prefer to shoot JPEG and not process RAWS, as the film emulation style doesn’t effect RAW images. You can change the function of that ring to a variety of other uses in the menu, however.
Like the X-S10, the X-S20 has Fuji’s In-Body-Image-Stabilization (IBIS). This is a hugely desirable feature, as it provides true sensor-based optical stabilization that works with all of your lenses. You can even input the focal length if you are using a manual focus or adapted lens and don’t have electronic contacts. The IBIS is more effective than on the X-S10, however, and is CIPA rated at 7 rather than 6 stops of assistance. I find IBIS an incredibly important feature for photography but even more for video capture. I forget how shaky handheld run and gun video footage is without IBIS!
Fuji has some of the best stabilization in the business and it is a genuine joy to use.
The viewfinder is a slightly undersized 0.39″ number with 2.36 million dots of resolution and a 0.62x magnification, so while LCD resolution was upgraded here we have the exact same viewfinder as before. It’s fine, but unexceptional, and I noticed a HUGE difference switching between it and the larger (0.5x), higher resolution (5.76m dot), and higher magnification (0.80x) viewfinder of the X-H2.
The X-S20 is compatible with Fuji’s new FAN-001 cooling fan accessory. This is an interesting concept, as it plugs into the body with the screen rotated out and actively cools the camera chassis to extend video recording time. You aren’t going to be able to close the screen with the FAN-001 attached (for obvious reasons), but it seems like a fairly intelligent solution to a common problem for those focused on long format video capture at higher bitrates and resolution levels.
Another new and interesting accessory that works well with the X-S20 is the TG-BT1 Tripod Grip. I’ve reviewed several such accessories in the past for other platforms, and they are very useful for Bluetooth control, extending your reach for vlogging, a quick tabletop tripod, and even for video capture where you have the major controls right at hand. It’s particularly useful if you have one of the powerzoom lenses (like the kit lens 15-45mm OIS PZ) as you can smoothly zoom in our out without grasping a ring of any kind. I really like the 18-120mm F4 OIS PZ for its superior build, great zoom range, and constant aperture (which helps when zooming through the focal range).
I like the X-S20 as a compact and yet feature rich camera for most of the same reasons that I liked the X-S10 before it. There are a lot of positive strengths here, but, outside of the transition to the bigger, better battery and the addition of an additional 3.5mm port for headphone monitoring, there isn’t much here to distinguish the X-S20 from the X-S10 in the overall design and handling despite the $300 price increase.
Fujifilm X-S20 Autofocus System
The Fujifilm X-S20 inherits the focus system we’ve seen on a number of Fuji cameras beginning with the X-T3. It’s a good AF system that is competitive on paper with alternatives from other brands, though with a few practical limitations where Fuji still lags. We’ve got a hybrid phase detect/contrast AF system, with 425 phase detect points that are selectable across the frame. Use the rear wheel to expand or contract the active focus/tracking area.
The improvements come under the hood of this focus system and are largely attached to improved processing via the faster X Processor 5 along with an improved autofocus algorithm that Fuji developed for higher end cameras like theX-H2S. Also improved is the AI learning that adds a variety of subjects that can be detected and automatically tracked, including: Animal, Bird, Automobile, Motorcycle & Bike, Airplane, and Train modes. In full Auto mode, the camera will attempt to recognize and apply the correct mode based on the subject in the frame, which is great except for the fact that I don’t want to shoot in “Auto” mode. Your mileage may vary, however.
The thumbstick can be used to move the focus point around, and, if enabled, you can also touch on the screen even with your eye on the viewfinder to do the same. What I find less intuitive, however, compared to Sony and Canon is that even if you have all points active, the focus system will still search for focus only in the active “box”, which you still have to move around…unless there is a trackable subject on the screen. It’s fine for the most part once a subject has been selected, but even when you expand the focus area to whole sensor tracking a smaller green box remains and you essentially have to get that green box on the subject before whole sensor tracking begins. At that point the focus will follow all across the frame, but it feels a bit like the old focus/recompose method of the past. I prefer the Canon/Sony approach where the autofocus system AI scans for the subject across the whole frame (if enabled), and you can then override the subject it selects if so desired, but I find that 90% of the time it grabs the right subject.
The AI tracking will also track insects, and, as I’ve recently become a beekeeper, this was an interesting addition for me.
Though on paper the focus system is largely the same as what I’ve seen for a while, there has been a significant improvement in the quality and consistency of focus. The focus algorithms have improved, and it also helps that recent Fuji lenses have a more sophisticated autofocus system in them. The AI learning has definitively improved as well, and I find that once the system is tracking, it has good stickiness and good visual feedback that helps inspire confidence that tracking is taking place. The focus system is capable of precision focus, however, even at F1.2:
If there is a trackable subject, autofocus works well. The eye precision is not as exact as some of the best cameras, but it works very well in general. I tested with both humans and also a sequence with Nala at a variety of focus distances and angles.
One of the key improvements here is improved buffer depth. That’s due to a faster processer (X Processor 5 mentioned before) and an upgrade to the memory card compatibility (UHS-II instead of just UHS-1 SD cards). The shutter burst rate is good, with 8 FPS available with the mechanical shutter but a jump up to 20 FPS available with the electronic shutter. One can even stretch that up to 30 FPS in their “sports mode” that has an additional 1.25x crop factor (smaller files can move through the pipeline faster). Here’s a look at the X-S20 figures (in bold) vs the X-S10 figures. UR = Uncompressed RAW. LR = Lossless Compressed RAW. CR = compressed RAW
Mechanical shutter (8 FPS): 35 UR | 90 LR | 1000+ JPEG or CR | X-S10 = 18 UR | 18 LR | 23CR | 105 JPEG
Electronic shutter (20 FPS): 28 UR | 44 LR | 79 CR | 256 JPEG | X-S10 = 17 UR, LR, or CR | 32 JPEG
20.9 MP Crop/Sports Mode (30 FPS): 28 UR | 62 LR | 88 CR | 407 JPEG | X-S10 = 17 UR, LR, or CR | 29 JPEG
What we see is not only more speed (typically twice as many frames at least) but also more versatility in buffer depth for different file depth. At 8 FPS you can shoot essentially endless JPEGs or Compact Raw, and the 90 Lossless Compressed RAW buffer means that you can have over 11 seconds of continuous image capture. The faster 20 FPS electronic shutter gives you less depth, obviously, though you still get as much as 4 seconds of continuous burst when shooting Compressed RAW and plenty of time if you choose JPEGs (the 256 vs 32 figure really jumps out). These figures definitely move the X-S20 towards the head of the class for this level of camera. Shooting a burst allowed me to catch this “bee’s dance” where one bee is taking off and another seems to be doing a headstand (shot with the Tamron 150-500mm):
Video autofocus is definitely improved, as we now have the ability to have similar AI tracking of the same variety of subjects during video capture, and I find autofocus when shooting video more confident in general. I tested video pulls with several lenses along with face tracking and found the results were mostly very good, though I did see a bit more stepping in some focus pulls than what I see with recent Canon or Sony cameras. Some of that comes down to the lenses, obviously, but I’ve also had the chance to test some lenses (like those from Viltrox and Tamron) in both Fuji X-mount and Sony E-mount, and autofocus pulls feel a little smoother and more confident on Sony bodies.
The X-S20 allows you to configure the shutter so that the camera will automatically switch between mechanical and electronic shutters depending on shutter speed. The mechanical shutter continues to have a budget camera 1/4000th shutter speed limit, but that’s easily overcome by the switch to electronic where the shutter speed limit is a whopping 1/32,000th of a second. Both of these figures are carryovers from the X-S10.
On paper, the focus system is largely the same as the X-S10, but real world performance is definitely improved. There’s more confident subject tracking, deeper buffers, and generally more reliable autofocus across the seven different lenses I used during my test period. Fuji isn’t quite at the level of Canon or Sony when it comes to autofocus performance, but the gap isn’t as big as it used to be, either.
Fujifilm X-S20 Video Performance
Video performance is another key area of improvement for the X-S20, furthering its credentials as a very good hybrid photo/video machine. We’ve already noted the physical improvements, which include the addition of a dedicated headphone monitoring jack and the cooling fan accessory to make sure that overheating is never a problem. But also improved is the resolution and bitrate options here. Whereas the X-S10 was capped at 4K30, the new X-S20 will let you shoot 6.2K30 and 4K60 in either UHD or DCI framing. Bitrates go as high as 4:2:2 10-bit internally up to 360Mbps (only 8 bit recording was available internally on the X-S10). Here’s a look at the various formats, resolutions, and bitrates available.
You can also choose slightly better than HD resolution DCI 2K framing (2048 x 1080) and get up to 240P in high speed recording mode. It is worth noting also that we no longer have a forced recording limit of 29:59 either; you are now only limiting by the size of your recording media or temperature. You have the ability to output either Apple ProRes RAW or Blackmagic RAW footage at 12 bit resolutions provided you have a suitable ATOMOS or Black Magic external recorder. The dinky micro-HDMI port doesn’t necessarily inspire confidence for serious external recording, however, though, to be fair, you have to skip the X-T5 and go right up to the X-H2 or X-H2S to get a full size HDMI port.
We’ve also got an upgrade to F-Log 2 and up to 14 stops of dynamic range on tap, and it’s worth nothing that all 19 of Fuji’s film simulations are available for video recording as well as photos. You have further options to tweak the look of footage in the menus to really get a look that you like even if you don’t want to spend time grading footage.
Another structural change is the addition of the headphone monitoring jack to the right side of the camera; a move clearly designed around video capture.
Fuji cameras in general produce very nice footage with good detail, excellent color, and, when shooting LOG, excellent dynamic range.
As mentioned earlier, there is a dedicated VLOG mode on the dial that gives you those options for when you are both creator and camera operator. Another really intriguing improvement is the ability to use the X-S20 as a dedicated webcam without the need for software. It’s as simple as connecting the X-S20 to the computer with a USB-C cable.
All of this adds up to a very versatile little video platform, and it seems from Fuji’s promotional materials to this point that they marketing the X-S20 as a creator/vlogger camera. I’ll note that using the TG-BT1 Tripod Grip adds versatility to the idea of this being a vlogger camera. It gets the camera another 8 inches away from you and gives you some handy controls on that grip along with a more ergonomic way to hold the camera.
Fujifilm X-S20 Sensor Performance
The 26.1Mpx X-Trans sensor in the X-S20 is a familiar one to me. This is now the fifth Fujifilm camera I’ve tested that uses this sensor (X-T3, X-T30, X-T4, X-S10, and now X-S20), so it is pretty familiar by this point. There isn’t really anything new The sensor was originally developed for the X-T3, where Fuji said of the X-T3’s sensor, “[with] a newly developed sensor, the X-T3 features an APS-C-format 26.1MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor, which has a back-illuminated design to afford smooth tonal rendering, improved low-light performance, and a low native ISO 160 setting. As an X-Trans sensor, it still utilizes the randomized pixel array, too, which provides a high degree of image quality and sharpness due to the omission of an optical low-pass filter. Versus conventional pixel patterns, the X-Trans design more closely mimics the organic nature of film in order to produce nuanced colors and tonal transitions, while also reducing moiré and aliasing.”
It used to be that this was the higher resolution point of the Fuji X lineup, with a more standard Bayer 24MP sensor used on some lower models, but now the X-H2 and the X-T5 utilize a much higher resolution 40MP sensor. This 26MP sensor is a good but not exceptional one. I’ve spent time with and reviewed most all of the competition, so, my quick conclusion is that this sensor is a competitive but not a clear winner in any category. The Sony 24Mpx sensor in many of its cameras has a bit more dynamic range and slightly better ISO performance. Canon has the resolution win with 33Mpx in its M6 Mark II. I’ve also not personally seen any area where I find X-Trans to be superior in some way to Fuji’s more traditional 24 MP Bayer sensors (like on the X-T200 that I recently reviewed). Fuji says that the X-Trans sensor produces a more film-grain-like noise pattern, but frankly this seems a little hyperbolic. I don’t really see it. Here’s a look at the various file sizes and framing options:
If you don’t want the technicalities, here’s a brief summation of the sensor performance. This sensor has a smaller native ISO range than the X-T5 or X-H2 at ISO 160-12,800 (those cameras have a base ISO of 125). Most competing camera from Sony or Canon have a larger ISO range that starts even lower at ISO 100. I like to charitably call this Fuji being conservative and avoiding the marketing extremes. I have found that Fuji competes well with, say, Sony, across its native range but Sony continues to have usable results after 12,800.
Likewise, Fuji’s sensors don’t quite have the same amount of dynamic range as competing Sony sensors (close to a stop less DR at base ISO), though the Fuji sensors are more competitive at higher ISO values. I found that shadow recovery is clean, but I start to see highlight clipping earlier on. Fuji does have a feature called DR200/DR400 that open up at higher ISO values (320/640) that will sample the highlight information from the base ISO while taking the midtone and shadow information from the selected ISO value. This does help the dynamic range to be more competitive.
I also find Fuji images a little more complex to sharpen, as the X-Trans sensors have a unique way of handling information.
But what the sensor does have is Fuji’s excellent color science. Many people love Fuji colors (myself included), and they include a number of their film emulations that can give a unique “feel” to images and/or video footage. I’m currently loving the Astia/Soft profile for a great look that works well on a wide variety of images. Fuji also has a fantastic JPEG engine, so if you just want to take photos and not spend a lot of time editing them to get the look you want, you may really enjoy the Fuji approach. Fuji also does a great job with in camera correction profiles, and so often the JPEG output looks even better than what the RAW images might suggest is possible. Note: as there are no changes to the sensor itself, the following are results given
ISO Performance
The native ISO range of Fuji’s 26Mpx X-Trans sensor is more limited than alternatives from Sony or Canon, running from ISO 160 to 12,800, with an expanded range going down to ISO 80 and moving up to 51,200 on the high end. I personally don’t ever use expanded ISO ranges and consider them more marketing than actually useful.. The native range is usable throughout, and even images ISO 12,800 are perfectly usable in many situations. Here’s a look at an image and crop of a guitar taken at ISO 12,800:
There’s some obvious noise at a pixel level, but the basic image is perfectly useful. Here’s another image at ISO 12,800 where I’ve used the Fuji ACROS + G monochrome simulation, and I would argue that the noise in this image is quite film-like and pleasing.
So how about at lower extremes? At ISO 800 there is a tiny addition of noise only detectable in the shadows. There isn’t a lot of difference from base ISO, however, and moving on to ISO 1600 shows little difference. At ISO 3200 there is slightly less contrast and slightly more noise, but still at a very acceptable level:
That pattern continues at ISO 6400 and 12,800, where the noise becomes rougher and more visible in shadow areas, with 6400 being cleaner than ISO 12,800.
You can go up into an “extended” range that gives you the 25,600 and 51,200 options. The first might be usable in non-critical situations, but few people will be happy with what ISO 51,200 is going to give you for any kind of application.
I will say that ISO 25,600 in particular does do a good job of “color fastness”. If we step back and look at the images on a global level, we can see that the sensor has done a good job of keeping a consistent color balance without color shift or color banding.
This is a solid ISO performance, and this is at least one area where the older 26MP sensor found in the X-S20 is going to deliver better results than the larger resolution 40MP sensor of the X-H2 or X-T5.
Dynamic Range Performance
I value dynamic range within a camera in two specific areas: the ability to cleanly lift shadows without introducing noise or color banding and the ability to recover highlights without introducing “hot spots” where information has been permanently lost. The value of good dynamic range is in the margins of photography, as eliminating shadows or recovering blown out highlights doesn’t always produce the better image. Having good dynamic range (particularly if you shoot RAW), allows you a lot more creative vision over how the final image will turn out (particularly with Adobe’s new AI tech for getting more information out of the sky). This shot, for example, has all of the rich detail in the shadows and colors of the trunk of the fallen tree and the moss on it, but also allowed me to recover the sky rather than just a blown out mess. This shot was taken with the new Fujinon XF 8mm F3.5, which is a very sweet little lens, by the way.
Fuji has an extra trick up its sleeve to help you maximize dynamic range performance in such scenes, which we’ll get to in just a moment.
In my tests, I found that the X-S20 did an excellent job of recovering shadows very cleanly. Here we have an image that I purposefully underexposed by four stops. As you can see in the original RAW image, there is very little information left there. In post I added those four stops back into the recovered image. What we find is an image that has been recovered with very little penalty. Contrast looks good and the image is nice and bright.
Here’s a look at that same image at a pixel level. We see little additional noise, no banding or discoloration, and a nice restoration of contrast to the image.
As is often the case, however, highlight recovery lags behind shadow recovery. While a 2 stop highlight recovery is nice and clean, by 3 stops the recovered image is not natural looking at all:
Moving beyond that is obviously a fools errand. But Fuji does have a nice workaround if you want more dynamic range. If you move beyond the base ISO to either ISO 320 or 640 (and beyond), two new options open up in the menu. These are DR200 and DR400. What these do is essentially split the sensor readout so that the shadow information is gathered from the current ISO setting while the highlight information comes from base ISO. At ISO 320 that gives you one additional stop in the highlights, while at ISO 640 you gain two. This allows you to overexpose the image slightly so that you have plenty of information in the shadows, but since there is one or two stops less exposure in the highlights, you have plenty of ability to recover blown out areas in post. A three stop highlight recovery using DR200 looks just fine:
I can go even further using DR400. Here’s a four stop overexposure (look how blown out the image is on the left), and how cleanly it recovers using DR400:
I certainly will often utilize this for landscape images when I’m shooting Fuji. My priority was exposing for the interesting textures of the little barn in this shot, but rather than a white, blown out sky, I was able to recover something interesting in the sky to add to the image.
I personally enable DR400 in camera, and then it is ready if I have to raise the ISO level (either intentionally or not). Dynamic range naturally diminishes as the ISO raises anyway, so it can be a way of getting better results when the ISO is up. That’s not to say that you should shoot this way all the time, as often retaining contrast and either crushed shadows or blown out highlights makes for a better photograph, but having this technique available to improve dynamic range certainly has its uses…just don’t go too crazy on those sliders!!
X-S20 Color
Color science is the one area where there is a fair amount of consensus on Fuji. It’s definitely something that Fuji does well, and I think it’s true both on the camera sensor side and in their optical glass. Fuji color tends to be really nice, with good saturation levels and a pleasing transition of color tones. I shot this image of a still lake with the 8mm F3.5 and the X-S20, and I think the colors look lovely.
Likewise a standard shot of the woods, where the greens look really rich but without feeling garish:
Fuji is also well known for their in-camera film simulations and excellent JPEG engines, and I know there are a lot of people who choose Fuji for this reason. They don’t want to mess with post processing and just want to be able to get great photos right out of camera. If you do shoot RAW files, however, it is easy to choose those same film simulations in your editing software (I primarily use Adobe products, myself). Here’s an example from the X-T4 shown first with Adobe’s Landscape profile.
Now Astia (Soft)
Now Classic Chrome
Provia
Velvia
Eterna (Cinema)
Classic Chrome is little less saturated but often has a tasteful look to it. I find Velvia (which is Vivid) is often too intense for me, but can be great for landscapes. Provia is the Standard, and it is fairly neutral. Astia is “Soft”, and it’s another one I like. Your mileage may vary, and what I like for one type of image is not necessarily what I like for another. Velvia is terrible for portraits but often works fine for landscapes, for example.
I also enjoy the monochrome film simulations and also the ability to go into the menus and tweak the look in several ways. For example, if I select Acros, I’ve got the added ability to select whether to apply a Yellow Filter (more contrast, darker skies), Red (slightly more extreme of yellow), or Green (for better skin tones). There is also an option to warm or cool the monochrome image in camera. You can move to near-sepia on the warm side and near-selenium on the cool side. This shot of a coiled rope looks great in Acros + R (red filter):
You can also control grain (if that’s your thing) in camera as well. Bottom line is that color science and the ability to manipulate color in camera remains a great strength for Fuji cameras…and you can utilize that same color science in video as well.
I really liked the fusion of X-T series features in a smaller, cheaper, more accessible package when the X-S10 was launched. That continues to be the lane that X-S20 operates in, though it seems like Fuji is pushing the video side of things in the X-S20. That stands to reason, as there are more tangible improvements available on the video side of things in the X-S20, from the improved video options (resolutions, bitrates, formats) to accessories like the grip and cooling fan. The main physical addition is a headphone monitoring jack, and while photographers will also benefit from the much larger battery, it will impact video shooters arguably even more. Even the inclusion of the VLOG option on the mode dial and the options that it opens up are obvious attempts to market this camera to a new audience. If you happen to be in this audience, the Fujifilm X-S20 should be a very compelling potential camera for you.
There are fewer innovations on the stills side of things, though the improved autofocus is welcome as well as the improvements to battery life and IBIS. Owners of the existing X-S10 who primarily shoot photos might not feel any great urgency to upgrade, however, as this is the same sensor, largely the same body, and mostly the same autofocus system as what is found in the X-S10…and with a significant price increase.
I’ve enjoyed using the X-S20, though the viewfinder feels a little constricting at this point and I’ll never be a fan of a memory card slot located in the battery compartment. There’s less of a price divide between the X-S20 and the more robust X-T5 than there was between the X-S10 and the X-T4, though perhaps not everyone is interested in moving to the higher resolution point of the X-T5. But you can get a used X-T4 for a few bucks less than the X-S20, which may cause a little bit of frustration for those looking for a clear upgrade path. I’m always glad to see choices on the market, and, while I don’t find the X-S20 as compelling based on the market as I did the X-S10, it is a nice evolutionary upgrade over what was already a very nice camera. Decisions, decisions…
Keywords: Fujifilm, X-S20, FujiFILM X-S20, X-S20Review, X-T5, Fuji X-H2, Fuji X-S20 Review, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, 100-400mm, 8mm F3.5, 18-120mm F4, XF, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, 26MP, 26 MP, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Fujifilm X-S10 was one of my favorite Fuji cameras of the previous generation. I gave it a positive review when it was released roughly 2.5 years ago as I liked the balance of bringing some of the best features of the X-T series into a smaller, cheaper package. A lot of Fuji cameras occupy the premium end of the APS-C space, and the X-S10 provided a strong camera at the roughly $1000 USD price point that largely had superior specs to alternatives from other brands. The Fujifilm X-S20 is the successor to the X-S10, and, as always, there’s some pros and cons. On the plus side, there are a number of core improvements (particularly on the video side), but, in the negative column there is a jump in price from the $1000 range up to $1300. There was nearly a $700 gap between the X-S10 and the X-T4; the gap between the X-S20 and the X-T5 is only $400, which will certainly leave a few buyers strongly considering that camera instead.
The X-T5 received the higher resolution sensor of the X-H2 (40.2 MP) while the X-S20 carries on with the older 26MP X-Trans BSI-CMOS sensor found in a number of other Fuji cameras. This might be part of Fuji’s market strategy, however, as not everyone needs (or wants) the higher resolution point.
The X-S10 was a bit more revolutionary than the X-S20 as it was the first of Fuji’s lower priced models to get features like IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization), the 26MP X-Trans sensor, faster burst rates, and a fully articulating LCD screen. The X-S20 is more evolutionary than revolutionary with more subtle improvements. A lot of the core features remain the same:
26.1MP BSI X-Trans IV CMOS sensor
ISO 160 to 12800 (80 to 51200 extended)
Hybrid AF system (117 contrast / 425 Phase Detect points)
Up to 20fps continuous shooting with electronic shutter (30fps with 1.25x crop)
1/4000th second max. shutter speed (1/32,000th using the electronic shutter)
0.39-in OLED EVF with 0.62x magnification, 100Hz
Similar Dimensions (the X-S20 is 1.7mm wider and 26g heavier)
Single SD card slot
Key improvements include:
Larger NP-W235 battery (from higher end models) that nearly doubles shots and video record time
Deep AI learning autofocus tracking (similar to X-T5 and X-H2)
Newer/faster X-Processor 5
Slightly improved IBIS
Up to 6.2K video and 4K60 options
Improved LCD resolution
Card slot now supports UHS-II
Deeper buffer
Can be used as a webcam via the USB-C port
When you add all of these up it equals an improved camera in a number of key areas, but there really isn’t a lot of new features that jump off the page. This is a pretty common trend in camera development, in my experience, as while some generations really push the envelope for new features, the next generation is often where those features are refined and the camera matures. In short, it’s in that second generation that things start to work as they should! The challenge here is that Fuji has elected to do a significant price increase on the cycle where there isn’t a lot of headline new features or upgrades. Will that present a marketing challenge? Will the X-S20 be as successful at $1300 as the X-S10 was at $1000? That remains to be seen.
For those that want a smaller, lighter, simpler camera that has many similar features to the higher end Fujifilm X-T5 (my review here), the X-S20 offers a compelling package. It has solid autofocus, competitive buffer depth, long lasting battery life, and very good image quality. It also happens to be quite a little video powerhouse, as we’ll see. It also comes at a great time for the Fuji ecosystem, as Fuji’s opening up to third party lenses has opened a floodgate of new development from Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Viltrox, and more. I’ll use a few of those new lenses in this review, including the Tamron 11-20mm F2.8 RXD and the Viltrox Pro AF 75mm F1.2. I’ve also got some interesting new lenses on hand from Fuji, including the new XF 8mm F3.5 wide angle lens and the XF 18-120mm F4. I’ll also throw in a few shots from the extremely inexpensive XC 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ kit lens. The question to be answered is if the X-S20 ends up feeling “worth the money” relative to Fuji’s alternative offerings. You can get my thoughts by watching my definitive video review or reading my text review…or just enjoy the photos below.
Thanks to Fujifilm Canada for sending me a review sample of the X-S20 and some lenses. As always, this is a completely independent review. All conclusions are my own.
Keywords: Fujifilm, X-S20, FujiFILM X-S20, X-S20Review, X-T5, Fuji X-H2, Fuji X-S20 Review, Fujinon, Dustin Abbott, Review, Sensor, Tracking, IBIS, Stabilization, Eye AF, 100-400mm, 8mm F3.5, 18-120mm F4, XF, Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, 26MP, 26 MP, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, APS-C, X-Trans, letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
One of the biggest advantages for APS-C is the ability to have large aperture prime lenses that are still compact and lightweight. The Fujinon XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR weighs only 360g while boasting an extremely nice build quality, great weather sealing, good autofocus, and having the nice color rendition that Fuji optical glass provides. It was announced in September 2021, and, being a newer lens, has Fuji’s updated focus design that makes it more versatile for things like video. The XF 33mm offers a full frame 50mm equivalent angle of view (normal), and as such is going to be an indispensable addition to many photographer’s kit. This is an easy lens to produce lovely photos with.
The single greatest challenge for the XF 33mm is not some flaw of its own but rather the fact that there are two other XF mount 33mm F1.4 lenses to choose from: the Viltrox 33mm F1.4 at under $300 and the Tokina atx-m 33mm F1.4 at $350. The Fuji XF 33mm comes in at a much more premium $800 price point. I haven’t spent time with the Tokina, but I did review the Viltrox and found it to be fairly strong lens. The Fuji is the more mature, nuanced lens, but it will face a bit of a value question by comparison.
That’s a financial decision, obviously, but I will say that this has been one of my favorite Fuji primes that I’ve reviewed thus far. The lens offers nice colors, a decent magnification ratio that bests the other two alternatives, pleasant bokeh, and good sharpness.
Follow Me @ YouTube | Patreon | Instagram | Facebook | DA Merchandise | Flickr | 500pxThanks to Fujifilm Canada for loaning me the X-H2 and lenses for this review. As always, this is a completely independent review and my conclusions are my own.
Receive a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.