Fuji X100F: Worth Ditching the X100T?

[cgw]

"Of course," say all the Fuji cheerleaders. But a few reviewers, like Eric Kim, make what seems a valid argument that it's really not worth it. The jump from 16 to 24mp isn't as breathtaking as Fuji's pets claim. May borrow a friend's X100F soon. He's underwhelmed so far doesn't see IQ improvement sufficient to warrant the price bump over the T. Anyone able to comment on the F-vs-T issue?

 

[pixmedic]

To be fair though, 16 to 24mp wasn't breathtakingly different for my Nikon DSLRs either.
I don't imagine it's any different for canon, pentax, or any other manufacturer.
The difference might be seen more in very large prints and extreme crops.

I'm quite happy with the images from both my Fuji. Both 16mp, one Bayer and one x-trans.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

 

[Gary A.]

I found a lot more detail in the 24mp (XT2/XP2) over the 16mp (XP1/XT1/X100S). In most cases greater detail doesn't make or break an image (the exception being landscape, architectural some macro) ... but a stop of low light noise is very nice and does make a significant difference to me, as I shoot a lot of low light. 24mp at ISO 6400, looks like 16mp at ISO 3200.

 

[cgw]

Thanks for the replies. Think I'll shoot my X100T till it conks out or embarrasses me.

 

[fmw]

Good plan. Sensors have become trivial. All the current ones are capable great performance. I once posted some images of the same subject made with Nikon D7000 and D7100 and included 100% crops of each. There were slight differences in color rendition probably due to different JPEG engines, but you couldn't really tell them apart in terms of overall image quality.

I shoot my internet product shots with a 16mp sensor. 1 mp would be more than enough and was when that is what was available. The final images are 500 X 500 pixels. That is 1/4 of a megabyte.

I think upgrading to get a denser sensor is really pretty silly. It made sense 10 years ago. Today's sensors are all great.

 

[johngpt]

My beloved X100 classic began having worsening troubles with its power switch over the months since last October when it fell over on a tripod. When I could no longer reliably power it on or off, I got the X100F.
Fujifilm is no longer repairing the X100 classic or X100S models. They no longer have parts. I got this info directly from the east coast US Fujifilm repair phone number.

I had been shooting a lot of infrared with the X100 classic through a Hoya R72 filter.
I could shoot handheld with ISO 1600, f/4.0 or 5.6 with shutter speed of 1/15 or even 1/4 second.
I found that the X100F doesn't have the same capability. I was having to bump the ISO to 3200 or higher.
At 1/15 or 1/4 second sharpness was hit or miss.
While I really like the X100F image quality other than through the IR filter, I missed the ability of the X100 classic to shoot that IR so much that I purchased a used one from B&H.

The image quality of the X100 classic still compares well to the image quality of the X100F. I have not noticed a decrease in the X100F quality by choosing to shoot compressed raw rather than uncompressed. The file sizes are more manageable in Photoshop.

So therefore, my advice would be to stick with your X100T until it no longer operates.

 

[jcdeboever]

for me, the x100f joystick is a worthy feature. the front control dial, button layout, and iso dial mimics xt2. I like the flash options as well. is it worth it? I don't know but the joystick puts it over as well as HSS.