Fuji postpones fw updates for the X cameras to fix an error…
Let’s catch up with some important Fuji news. First, it sounds almost unbelievable but Fuji claims that the new X20 compact camera with tiny 2/3 inch sensor outperforms the much larger Sony RX100 sensor quality and even the 12 Megapixel MFT sensor! And the graph on top is here to “prove” it. It has been shown at a presentation in Barcelona and our friends fromQuesabesde (translation here) picked it up.
For a short time Fuji UK (Click here to see the cached site) showed the info about new X cameras and lens firmware updates. The page has than been removed and release postponed because of an error that should be fixed soon. While you have to wait for the official release you may check out the latest two articles from Fuji “Guru” Rico Pfirstinger 
Decoding XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R LM OIS (on Fujirumors)
Using the XF14mmF2.8 R (on Fujirumors)
And here as a reminder the nfw update info:
Fujifilm X-Pro1 – firmware version: 2.03 Changes:
* Allows compatibility with the new “XF14mmF2.8R” lens.
* Improved performance of Auto Focus under various shooting conditions.
Fujifilm X-E1 – firmware version: 1.04 Changes:
* Allows compatibility with the new “XF14mmF2.8R” lens.
* Shutter release button now works when an external remote release is connected.
* Improved performance of Auto Focus under various shooting conditions.
* Audio performance has been optimised for the new Stereo Microphone MIC-ST1 (sold separately).
FUJINON XF35mm – firmware version: 2.02 Change:
* Improved accuracy of Auto Focus performance.
Dummy00001
5 months ago |“Fuji claims that the new X20 compact camera with tiny 2/3 inch sensor outperforms the much larger Sony RX100 sensor quality and even the 12 Megapixel MFT sensor!”
I bet it outperforms it the same ways the X Pro’s sensor “outperforms” the FF’s sensor.
Anyway, what makes the RX100 to stand out is not the sensor alone – it is its relatively versatile zoom and pocketability. The package as the whole. X20 might have longer zoom, but it makes no attempt at being pocketable.
Per K
5 months ago |The statement from Fuji needs be proven by independent evaluation before I believe it. On the other hand earlier statements from fuji saying X -Pro 1 about challenging existing “FF” cameras (Canon 5D mk II were very close to be true.
Sensors/processors develop all the time and comparing a 2013 sensor to a 2011 is a bit like “shooting a sitting bird”
Interesting though to see Fuji development of sensor/processor. Strong pace and lots creativity. They really add to development of cameras . The high end strategy impresses too.
Renato S.
5 months ago |Yeah, that’s exactly what I’ve been thinking.
I calculated the pixel density based on the crop factor of both. It’s like a 32MP APS-C X-Trans sensor vs 36MP APS-C Sony sensor and so far, for what we’ve seen, the X-trans sensor beat both 16MP and 24MP sensors from Sony. And at the tele end you can get a better bokeh with the X20 than the RX100, because of the f/2.8 aperture.
So I think that even though the Sony RX100 has a 1″ and the m4/3 12MP has 4/3″, this may be pretty much true and not just an over statement. More than that, Fuji’s color, DR are much better, the noise of the different color array of the sensor really look like a film grain, it’s very beautiful, I saw the BW pictures of the pre-production model, although I was a little disappointed with the amount of noise, I was impressed by the film like look.
z
5 months ago |I remember I was amazed when they launch X-Pro1 until they start brandishing other brands and showing bogus graph.
A quick googling take me to another point.
They seem to forgot that X-Pro1 is using Sony IMX071 sensor with custom CFA. They cheat on ISO too. With the same aperture, ISO and shutter speed, Fuji constantly underexpose, sometimes by many stops.
I can assure you, this graph is a nonsense.
Renato S.
5 months ago |I don’t really care about that graph, I like the DR, color the way the noise looks like grain, Sony does have a more “digital” feel to it, but anyway, I’ll wait for real comparisons. But I find very exciting how Fuji has been addressing their flaws based on consumers feedback, that’s very refreshing these days, they also don’t hold back when implementing new stuff. By today’s logic of doing this, Fuji wouldn’t have put this new hybrid AF in the X100, but rather waited for the XPRO2 or they wouldn’t have put the 1080p60 and waited for the XPRO2 and so on. Kudos for them, for me, they are making it right, that’s the kind of respect towards consumers that I expect. I won’t be buying a Fuji so soon, but I’m pretty much sure I will when I’m able to.
Denis
5 months ago |You didn’t get it as I see. In reality, X-Trans causes lower resolution than bayer for the same sensor density. The high ISO performance is about equal to APS-C high ISO performance with PPing with the only notice X-Trans pattern makes some NR algorithms easier to compute, and that’s it. In general, you will get slightly better pix with bayer sensor.
peevee
5 months ago |Whatever Fuji claims on this graph, is “marketingspeak”, i.e. lie. On their graph their old EXRCMOS sensor is above 12mpix 4/3 sensor. Let’s see what dxomark has to say about it:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/812|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/740|0/%28brand2%29/Fujifilm/%28appareil3%29/725|0/%28brand3%29/Olympus
Fujifilm FinePix X10 245 ISO
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 390 ISO
Olympus PEN EPL3 (old sensor) 499 ISO
They claim they raised sensor S/N by 30%. It would mean 318 ISO for the new sensor, even if it is true (which it is almost certainly not, no marketoid ever said truth, ever).
Of course E-PM2 gives more than 900 ISO…
Renato S.
5 months ago |not that Fuji’s statements are true but as if dxomark means so much either
Sergio
5 months ago |Divide marketing speak about performance by 2 to get actual results.