As someone who shoots the Q and M series, as well as Fujifilm, this is, hands-down, the most factual and nuanced discussion in which these two cameras are compared and contrasted. Thank you.
Any camera can be in the discussion, as long as somebody starts and shares that discussion. The point is, no matter how long you discuss, Leica will always be miles ahead of Fuji in every possible way. EVERY SINGLE WAY.
@@kubowich The Leica Q3 doesn’t have a built in ND filter while the X100VI does. So there’s at least one thing the Fuji does better. Furthermore many people would choose Fuji straight out of camera colors over Leicas any day. If anything this comparison shows that paying the Leica tax gets you diminishing returns. I own two Leicas, great cameras, but 100% overpriced compared to other offerings out there from different brands. Dollar for dollar the Fuji is by far the winner when you consider how much you pay for the results you get.
@@Wazhadnin-wj5te Imagine seeing the 28 summilux which can do proper hard stop manual focus and Autofocus attached to a full frame sensor and thinking a ND filter is a dunk. Ignoring that you can simply put a ND filter on the Leica. Fuji fanboys are the best 🤣🤣
Yep, my new X100VI is off on a tour of China in a few weeks. I guess I could have bought a Q3 and took a tent to West Wales instead at least the Q3 could stand the rain….
@@kubowich I just spend 10weeks on holiday in Europe for less than 2000. Drove through Sweden, Germany, France and Spain and even rented sn apartment for 1 month.
@@stayuntilforeveryou can BS yourself but please, don’t try this on me. You’ll spend 2000 on a monthly car rental + gas alone. I am from Europe so I have pretty much an idea how much things cost around here. 100 USD per tank of gas, 20-30 USD per meal…you get the picture. And that monthly rent thing :D hilarious. Did you rent a spot under a bridge?
Pretty sure pal2tech has a DR400 explainer but i can give it a go: When you crank the ISO, the same amount of light is hitting the sensor - but the sensor basically amplifies the signal. When you shoot at DR400 at ISO 640, it exposes the image at 160 - 1/4 of what you specified - and then amplifies the signal 4x (400%) to 640. What it does is then combine those two signals. It can do this in RAW because it’s working with analog signals to achieve this - not the digital file. This is also *why* you have a high ISO requirement - it works at the base ISO and higher, which on the X trans 4 sensor in the X100V and my XT30 is 160 , and then multiplies it. If there’s interest I might make a video, this is a very common question
So I think you're right about boosting the signal, which is why the required ISO goes up, but I don't think it it blending two exposures. Red, Canon and others have these features and the results look distinctly different from a high latitude image. If it were a dual gain sensor like the Alexa or C70, that would have a similar effect but that's not the case with this fuji sensor. Whatever it's doing, I love the results, but I would love even more to have a clear explanation from fuji.
Just rewatched the pal2tech video and seems like it’s actually using the min ISO (640 for 400% on my XT3 for example) or higher for the shadows and using a lower ISO for the highlights to avoid blowing them out.
@@razasnake That was my understanding. The magic is that the camera is adjusting the gain on separate parts of the sensor independently, pixel by pixel. I almost always use DR400 and I also use auto ISO quite a bit and I believe that the camera will adjust to 640 automatically if the dynamic range of the scene is high enough.
Hilarious that at 6:54 you just contradicted the entire strength of the Fuji system. You can do that all in camera, and once dialed in, not only have a full cohesive set of perfect JPEGs, but also save it into a profile. Throw the editing PC out the window and enjoy shooting! Fuji freed me from the headache of wasting time messing with RAW, and I shoot combined JPEG/RAW so the back up is there if I need it. The thing is, for the price of the Leica you can have the X100VI and an additional medium format GFX that simply is far beyond the Leica in regards to utility potential. Great review!
Had an X100v, sold it when I sold all my Fuji gear and switched to Sony for weddings , and picked up a Q2 for me. This was around 2 years ago. Sold the Q2 a month or so ago, and managed to snag an X100vi. Used it for a few days and although I loved the V, after using the Q2 it just wasn’t the same for me anymore. Sold the X100vi, bought a Q3 and over the last week, realised I’ve made the right choice. I wanna take it everywhere with me, and if I didnt have weddings, I’d sell everything and just have the Q3. Incredible camera
Selling my Fuji gear for a Q3 as well. Can I ask how you managed to score a Q3 so quickly? I ordered from my local shop around 3 weeks ago, and probably have a few months to wait.
I have both .. x100vi and q3 … I agree completely much more enjoy using the Q3.. what I’m starting to miss is my Q2M .. sold that once I had Q3 … won’t sell Q3 til Q3M comes out or keep both 😂 …. I’m still keeping the X100vi for now because of built in flash and being so compact … I got rid of everything (Sony & Fuji) when got I Q2M .. It’s so nice just having the all in one compact camera
As an owner of both these cameras I can say that this is the most open-handed, informative, mature comparison of these cameras I've seen on TH-cam. Well done!
The elephant in the room is that the X100VI is far more portable than the Q3. Which is the main point of the X100VI- the best camera is the one you have on yourself at all times. Unfortunately, the Q3's massive fixed lens actually makes it less portable than most cameras. Coupled with that extreme price tag, you're far more likely to take out X100VI and get more use out of it.
Calling the Q3 lens massive is a stretch. It’s not a pancake lens like the Fuji, but for full frame fast lenses, it’s quite compact. But I see what you’re saying.
Yeah I both agree and don’t. It’s definitely not as compact, but in practical they fit in the same bags and very compact compared to most pro camera systems. But it’s still a W for the Fuji
@@ibradeybunch I disagree, It's larger than most fuji primes. But more importantly, you can't take the lens off which results in you having to carefully carry a weird triangle shape around all day. The magic of the X100 is its portability, what's the point of the Q3 when it's more inconvenient than than your go to Mirrorless or DSLR camera?
@@stalman Yea I see your point, but in a bag I'd be a bit worried about damaging the Q3 lens unless you had exactly the right space for that shape. I think as a concept it doesn't work, but people still love it because its autofocus digital Leica. Just not the best comparison between use cases for cameras.
@@sssf55 I carried a Q around several foreign countries like Finland, Mozambique, South Africa. It was not awkward or uncomfortable to carry around all day. The difference between carrying a Q and an X100 is slight in reality. The main difference for me is 35mm vs 28mm as a field of view.
I have both cameras as well, and I use them for very different purposes. Like you said, Tyler, the X100 lives in the pocket of the jacket, or you wear it around your torso, to be there 100% of the time, ready to shoot amazingly rendered creative colors. The Q3 is on another level, meaning it does shoot for the most digitally accurate representation, regarding sharpness, contrast, and color, so it’s not for everyday shooting. It’s for that landscape/posed photo that you know you need all the data to work on it after the fact. But there’s one huge difference where the Fuji is king: software. So many times, my Q3 hung and failed because of software, not to mention the loss of photos because of that. That never happened to me on all the 4 X100s I owned. The recent Q3 update fixed a lot of issues, but then again, that update should have been the one released from day one, meaning they have issues with it. Finally, after contacting Leica and looking under the hood at the Leica app, the Q3 accepts .CUBE files to render on camera, like the Lumix cameras do, but just not officially. If that becomes a trend, the X100 series will have some tough competition. Great video as always!
@@bsmayerr the Leica Q3 has something called Looks, that you can upload from the app to the camera. Under the hood, it's .CUBE files, that are packaged with the app that the camera gets once you decide to upload it. I asked Leica if they would ever open that API part of the app to devs (like myself), and they said: "Not for now..."
@@schmitzoide If they ever do that, I can see a lot of people using it. I mean, the Looks they provided with the Q3 are kinda Meh in my opinion. But if they ever allow users to upload custom looks through the app, that would be huge!
Ive had a Q3 since beginning October 2023, I usually just shoot events so come back with easily 1k shots or more per event. I ‘ve take taken well over 10k photos with Q3, it never had any issues with it freezing or losing a file. I’ve always used Sandisk Extreme Pro 300mb UHS II 256gb and 128gb. Same card with my Q2M never an issue. I did have issues with X100vi freezing on me while shooting an event when I first got. Figured out reason was because I was shooting in bracket mode for film simulation, camera was not only making 3 different jpegs but also 3 raw files too, UHS I couldn’t handle that
@@casadelouie I have taken not even 3000, and lost about 10 of them, even ones that have a gray half bottom that sent to Leica where they promised a software update that would fix that (that eventually came out). I have 12k photos taken between the first edition of the X100, the 2nd, 5th and now 6th. No failures. Always used the recommended cards for both models. 🤷
Dont worry about laying your camera flat for the leaf shutter, that was a problem with the older Medium Format leaf shutters since they were so heavy and the mechanisms werent as robust as they are today. The modern leaf shutters are made with vertical storage in mind since the 2000s, so store it anyway you want. It wont damage 👍
I had my X100 blades lock up after a couple years in storage, that’s why I make the recommendation. But it goes for any lens that is being stored for a long time, aperture blades can lock up too
Dr400 is a must, have been using it since xt1 days, the extra dynamic range you got is impressive. I have never been impressed by smartphone dynamic range until iphone 15 pro, because the fuji is just as good as the iphone
@@gurugamer8632 in a practical world, there is zero downside to the dr400, yes it even affects raw. a lot of these reviewers and recipe maker doesn't understand shit. when making recipe, there is practically zero reason they told us what dr or noise reduction to use.
DR settings are also applied to RAW files. It shoots underexposed photo, thus having a lot of room for highlights, and then it pushes the exposure digitally to make it look normal.
@@stalman Watch Pal2Tech's Understanding Dynamic Range Settings video. Per usual, he covers this thoroughly with examples. Agreed that Fujifilm could do much better at communicating what is actually happening (ISO is raised to allow underexposing by 1 or 2 stops, therefore protecting highlights, and midtones-shadows are boosted during the A-to-D conversion) and that it applies to both JPG and RAW files. Edit: Even reading back my explanation would be confusing to the newcomer. Minimum ISO is raised. This gives the camera the room to drop the ISO during capture, thereby underexposing.
@@blankmelon There is also a color shift in the pictures when using the 400% Is better to leave the iso at 160 at push it raw. From what I can remember it does something to the RAW metadata in the file.
@@stalmanI don’t know if there are public documents, but folks have reversed engineered it by looking at the raw file and tags (looking at the raw file in Lightroom doesn’t count since it’s made to abstract these details away) If you want to know more, Search for RawExposureBias. It’s metadata in the raw file that tells the image editor how underexposed the image is, thus how much gain the software should apply to compensate. So the way software reads it, it loads the image, checks the bias and corrects the exposure- then that becomes the baseline 0ev for gain in the editor. Now, when you move the exposure slider back -2 ev, the software still has access to that highlight details. What this also means though is if you increase the exposure by +2ev, the image with DR400 will probably look noisier in the shadows than a shot with DR100, since the image with DR100 probably had a slower shutter speed or wider aperture to let in more light since the ISO is lower
Every time I learn something new from your videos 🤯 by far the best comparison between the Q3 and X100VI. For me, someone that also used both, the Q3 is by far higher quality in every aspect, but also less fun. It felt more like work. FUJI: Vibe, Atmosphere, Street, experimental Leica: Ads, Social Media, clean images
Great video!! But Sorry gotta roll my eyes on the leaf shutter store facing up tip. With all the leaf shutters I’ve used in 40 years in various lenses I’ve never heard this suggested nor have I had an issue
if you move the lever on the front of the X100VI for 3 seconds it sets up the ND filter on and off, freeing up the function button. its a default setting for the X1006
I'll be honest-it doesn't make much sense to compare the Fuji X100 (any model) with the Leica Q3. I've always been a Canon guy myself, but getting the X100 is still on my to-do list. In my view, it's a small powerhouse with a built-in ND filter and a leaf shutter, eliminating limitations on sync speed with any flash. This makes the X100 a uniquely compact tool for portraits, and its size is a big plus. You can achieve pro-level results with it, elevating your off-camera flash photography indoors or outdoors to another level with very little kit of gear. Additionally, there are telephoto and wide extenders available if you need a longer reach or wider angle-50mm or 28mm, respectively. In some ways, the X100 can even serve as a backup hybrid camera with its 35mm field of view lens for the price of just 35mm lens for Canon or Sony systems. One more thing to note is that enjoying photography is as much about mindset as it is about gear-it's a mental aspect that can always be adjusted to the gear you already have!
Indeed. ND, leaf shutter and flash sync at _any_ speed. Something the Leica and hardly any other cameras today can do. And all in a small package. Plus, having both an optical and electronic viewfinder is compelling as well.
Tyler. Not sure if you knew but you don’t have to map the top button to the nd filter. It’s already mapped out if the box to the viewfinder toggle. Simply hold it down for 3 seconds and it will activate the nd. Your welcome.
I didn’t think a fixed camera would ever be for me.. but since I got my x100vi I’ve hardly touched my Nikon Z8.. the convenience is a huge selling point.. the flash and nd filter are game changing also.. went to Dubai and it’s all I took with me and it was fantastic. I hope to one day test a Leica to see what the fuss is but I don’t think with the price point i can be sold
Q3 macro is forced f/2.8, so the X100VI is at a bit of a disadvantage at macro distances at f/2 by comparison. Just stopping down the 100VI to f/2.2 makes a huge difference.
I tried out both. I went with the VI. The Q3 only had a slightly wider FOV and slightly lower pixel density but the images from both were remarkably similar. The in-body stabilization on the VI vs the optical stabilization on the Q3 was also a big plus for the VI. And the VI is a lot lighter. I think you mentioned the cost difference, too. That also helped.
got my q3 in all places in dubai on a 1 day layover was the last one in stock they just got it in stock an hour ago from deliveries and picked it up. was nervous about dropping 6k but man..... i love that camera its all i use now. Having sonys, nikons, and fujis. Just because of the build quality the size and the colors and quality of glass is just unmatched. have a order for a fuji x100vi but keep getting pushed back by months...
I have a lot of Leica kit (including a Q3 43, digital CL, M11, M11 Monochrom, and SL2), but I played with a friend’s FujiFilm X100VI camera today, and I thought it was a very attractive camera.
Still not sure why the insistence on comparing these two cameras. They are quite different. The X100VI has an APS-C sensor; full frame for the Q3. Fuji is $1600; Leica is $6000. They both have their advantages and disadvantages including, unfortunately, both being back-ordered likely well into the future. I currently have a Fujifilm X100F, a Leica SL-2 and a Lumix G9. If I can snag one, I'd like to get the Leica D-lux 8 when it is released. In other words, infinite diversity in infinite combinations.
I’ve shot every generation of X100 since 2011 and have *never* heard of storing it lens up. Never had an issue with any of my cameras storing it ‘normal’ or sideways in a bag. Also never had an issue with my decades old hasselblad 501c and any of its leaf shutter lenses. Regarding DR, I have always shot Fujis at ISO400 with the increased dynamic range
@@stalman I vaguely remember the sticky aperture blade problem from the original x100 and came across random posts of ‘stuck shutter buttons’, but nothing about how storing your camera affects either. What evidence do you have of that claim?
Your comparison is spot-on. A small comment though on your intuition about DR (7:33), while the DR400 setting does adjust exposure downward during capture and then compensates by boosting shadows and mid-tones, it's essential to note that reducing exposure in Lightroom doesn't directly alter the light hitting the sensor. This setup is ideal for JPG shooting but compromises image quality in raw files. DR400 effectively reduces dynamic range by almost 2 stops, visible mainly in shadow areas. While Fuji's processing enhances JPGs with noise reduction and shadow boost, it sacrifices raw file potential. You can easily replicate it by underexposing your pictures 1 or 2 stops at minimum iso and then boosting midtones and shadows, although, the precise curve fuji uses is quite elusive.
Great review Tyler but you forgot to mention a very very important feature on Fujifilm X100VI, which is Hybrid Viewfinder! I am using X100F and Hybrid Viewfinder is the main reason that I love this camera. It's a very unique technology and well implemented in this compact camera. If you switch off LCD screen and only use Hybrid Viewfinder, you can shoot all day with its little battery. Besides there is a lens hood for Fujifilm X100VI, which is little and neat.
The DR settings are just baking in some tone curve manipulation, I tested the settings last year with my Xyla 21 to have a good handle on what it's doing. If you are ok with slightly noisier shadows, but gain a stop or two of highlight information, then it's totally worth it.
That would make sense and is probably the most likely explanation, but what variable is it changing to capture the lower exposure of the DR400 image? Obviously the shutter and aperture are what they are, so behind the scenes it’s using a lower ISO to save the highlights, but showing a higher ISO in the raw data? It could be, but I would love to get confirmation
@@stalman Yes, so it's just a metadata tag to the file and that tag tells the file what tone curve to attach to it. So the camera uses a low or base ISO and then the tone curve itself they use just mimics what the brightness of the shadows and midtowns would be if it were actually exposed at a higher ISO and since it's all their software architecture and they know how they are metering/calculating, etc. it's pretty accurate. The tone curve is pretty straightforward and easy to reproduce, so you could use it on other raw images or create a custom camera color profile with the same tone curve if you wanted to be able to have a similar experience with other camera brands.
Hey Tyler - thanks for the great video. The DR400 under exposes by 2 stops and then brightens it back up in camera by those two stops and saves the highlights that way. The ISO shown is actually reflects the comparative ISO after it's been brought up by 2 stops. In order to compare the DR100 and DR400 you need to underexpose the DR100 by 2 stops and then raise it back up again in LR - I expect you will see the similar results when doing things that way. Shooting RAW at DR400 is the same as shooting DR100 with -2 exposure comp all except the way the image will be displayed afterwards on the back screen and the starting point with lightroom. The RAW data is still the same. The real advantage of this is when shooting Jpeg since it allows you some of the Dynamic range advantages of RAW while shooting JPEG.
That’s my guess too but can you find any official Fuji info about it? Seems weird that we all just need to figure it out And the advantage is there in raw too, because underexposing by 2 stops is a miserable way to shoot
Is it me or does that just expose the limitation of this sensor? Sony sensors for example get full dynamic range (several stops more than DR400) from the non extended range of ISO, why do we need to bump up the ISO to 800 on Fuji to get a measly 11 stops is it of dynamic range?
If i shoot in bright daylight the raw Dynamic Range at 160 or 120 iso is totally enough for me. When there is massive highlights that i want to recover, i shoot in HDR 800+ in Fuji and somehow it has the best Dynamic range I've seen because it affects the raw files as well
If that were the case why would it need to be shot at 2x base iso? From what I have been lead to believe it exposes highlights at 2 stops lower than it exposes the shadows and merges them somehow? I may be wrong but I don't understand if its only boosting an underexposed image why it would need to shoot at ISO 500 min.
@@tobiahtayo5149 it’s to do with how ISO works. The same amount of light hits the sensor regardless of ISO. It then amplifies the signal off the sensor to get to your target ISO. Assuming a base ISO of 160, for example, an exposure at ISO 640 is effectively a shot at 160, amplified 4x (2 stops) to land at 640. This is an analog process, as I understand it, so the base signal and amplified signal sit on top of each other and get saved in the digital file. If you ask it to shoot DR400, you’re asking it to amplify the signal 4x - but it can’t do that below 4x the base ISO, it doesn’t math.
I have been using Fuji film cameras since 2014. In layman’s terms - it reduces highlights by 2 stops with the 400% and 1 stop with the 200% on RAW images too not just the in camera Jpegs, it’s baked in helps when shooting high contrast scenes. With respect to the base ISO it’s different between the medium format vs the aps-C format & the camera’s base ISO. Medium format 1 stop - 200% - 200iso Medium format 2stops - 400% - 400iso I don’t recollect how much it was on the APS-C cameras.
Thanks! Nicely done. I have the Fuji XT5, the Q2M, and the iPhone 14 right now and I’m very happy with my gear and my range! I’ll keep following you! Geoff
Be aware of the X100VI and its focusing abilities on near infinity distances. I have the X100VI and I love it. But, on a recent assignment, I came home with 35 images in a row of a stationary object - all out of focus. I felt that something was wrong the I was shooting and kept shooting and re-focusing. However, I still didn't get a single image with correct focus. This problem also occurs with wide angles on X-H2. Another note: The Leica Q is equipped with a 25mm lens that is cropped in to 28mm. This gives you a different compression than if it had been a straight 28mm.
For me the X100vi became a totally different camera after I started shooting JPEG with the film presets. I absolutely love it. The Leica's (M11 in my case) beats the Fuji hands down in RAW. Just wish the X100vi had 30 or so custom settings to have a bunch of classic films and then room for some experimental films.
Tip, if you hold the EVF/OVF switch to the right for few seconds it enables and disables the ND out of the box. Easier to reach and you can use the other button for something else.
Dear Tyler, here’s what I think is going on with the DR settings: Modern camera sensors are (mostly) ISO-less. This means that technically speaking the RAW data from the sensor should be able to have any selectable ISO setting applied afterwards. Unfortunately, all camera manufactuers are not transparent about this (see Tony Northrups video about it) When you set ISO 100 in camera, to achieve a ‘normal’ exposure on the meter, your exposure settings needed will deliver more light, leading to faster highlight blowout. If you raise the in camera ISO and compensate your SS/Iris, you will deliver the sensor less light overall. this should mean highlight detail is retained more. Where we get into speculation is what Fujifilm is doing in DR400 setting to achieve the same overall ‘exposure’ just with more highlight detail. But it makes sense why this should work, if the fujifilm sensors are overall more sensitive to highlight overexposure.
It's actually really weird (interesting) that there is a "ISO Bracketing" on Fuji cameras. It takes only ONE image, but it produces 3 RAW files with different ISO. You'd think it will take 3 images using different ISO say ISO 100, 200 and 400 but it doesn't. Camera only shoots once. How does it work? I don't know, but I think there's something similar going on here with DR400.
As with shooting transparency film in the old days, shooting JPEG will teach you more about proper exposure than RAW processing can. It removes the crutch of RAW (you siad you "always add some presets" in processing your RAW files). Learn the camera's capabilities shooting JPEG and you have more photography time, less computer time.
In DR400, the camera is taking the photo at an actual ISO of -2 EV. So when you shot at ISO 500 with DR400, it was actually captured with the sensor gain at ISO 125 and the camera boost the shadows and midtones in camera and baked into the RAW files. In contrast, when you shot at ISO 500 with DR100, it was shot with the sensor gain set at actual ISO 500. Other cameras can do this too BUT they don't bake it into the raw file. Instead, it's just metadata that your software may or may not acknowledge. For example, if I use a similar feature on my Nikon Z (Active D-Lighting), some tone sliders will be adjusted already when I import the RAW file in Lightroom. The beauty in Fujifilm's implementation is it makes the sliders on the editing app much more powerful in highlight recovery. The only downside is possible more noise and loss of detail in the shadows and mids but they hardly matter as the in-camera processing is very good and looks natural. I always have it on my GFX and on my X-Series cameras when I still had one.
Interesting to note that the Q3 is leaf shutter... I would think that type of shutter would have problems quickly closing and then opening and closing for the actual exposure, as it has to with an evf. I would think that the Fuji shutter would wear much more slowly when using the ovf. Shut-open-shut in quick succession seems like a lot more stress than open-shut, it would be interesting to know if this is actually the case.
The Fuji owner's manual says nothing about storing the camera flat due to the leaf shutter. I have a Mamiya 7 with 3 (leaf shutter) lenses and that says nothing about storage orientation either.
All lens and shutter blades are lubricated and in regular use, it stays evening distributed. If those blades sit vertically without moving for a long period, gravity can gradually dry some of the blades and cause sticking. Whether your instructions say it or not, it’s a thing that happens and I’ve run into.
It's interesting what you say about the best position to store digital cameras with leaf shutter. I had never read that they should not be stored vertically, I imagine you mean if they are stored for very long periods of time.
Well if you plan to keep your camera for a long time, the more it spends on its front or back, the less chance it will jam And I say this because it’s happened to me
one thing often gets lost in translation when reviewing Leica (Hasselblad, etc.) camera gear vs. traditional consumer/prosumer gear. i spend a lot of time in the audiophile community as well, and an important thing to learn quickly is: you are only the customer of a product when you can purchase it and not notice the difference in your bank account - regardless of if it costs $100, $1,000, or $10,000. The same is absolutely true here. If $6K for a fixed-lens camera sounds like anger-inducing absurdity, remember: you are not the customer. thanks for the comparison and sharing your thoughts! both of these cameras are beautiful. appreciate your insights.
That’s a good way to put it, I think that’s the source of anger towards a lot of expensive products. I know the price of a Neumann would be lost on me, but I’m still happy they exist
Your observation about storing the camera is intriguing. I didn't come across any mention of it in the manual, but it's good to be aware of. Additionally, the camera was positioned this way in the box
@@juantasticothat doesn't happen with modern leaf shutters, it has been fixed since the 2000s. It was an issue for older MF leaf shutters since they were so big and the mechanisms less robust. Shouldn't be a problem for today's shutters so store away 😊
The Fuji is an ok camera with an average Pancake lens that can't resolve that resolution and you can't replace. The Leica Q is a 3 thousand dollar camera that you buy for 6 thousand dollars. And you can't change the lens.
As someone who jumped from a x100v (not vi) to a Q3, I can say with confidence that the Fuji x100v line and the Leica Q line are perfect examples of the Pareto principle. You can achieve 80% with the Fuji, but for the remaining 20% you have to go into the (expensive) Leica rabbit hole. One additional point, which is often missed in such comparisons: there is nearly no 3rd Party aftermarket for Leica. You want a 2nd battery? Grab an official one for 170 €…
hey i'm not sure if you're still responding to comments on here but i've never heard that it's better to lay the camera down because of the leaf shutter. do you have any resources or links with more information on this? i have never heard this and couldn't find anything when google searching. i just see people asking whether or not it's better to leave the shutter cocked. i also haven't heard anybody else mention it when talking about the x100 series.
Finally u r making videos about Leica❤️ Can u plz make youtube videos about film photography, cuz film isn’t dead and i would love to see that content from u 🎞️🎞️
*(almost) NOBODY talks about DR200 and 400, and even less people talk about Dynamic Range priority, which is INCREDIBLE and makes an enourmous difference in both film sims, and also preserving shadows or highlights in otherwise impossible situations.
7:04 been shooting dr400 at 640 iso since 2020! game changer. This is how sensors should have been designed from the start instead of clipping highlights, the OPPOSITE of how traditional film responds. If the Leica M11 had this feature, it would be the perfect camera. Especially the monochrom edition that already had a great high Iso response.
My thoughts on Fuji DR settings. If you only shoot jpeg, the DR settings (DR200 or DR400) can be a useful way to preserve your highlights. But the DR settings definitely do affect the raw files, as the DR settings basically underexpose the image in camera. So if you only shoot raw, I’d suggest you turn off DR (ie set to DR100), turn on the blinkies and protect your highlights in camera (using manual control or the exposure compensation dial). If you shoot both jpeg and raw, I still think it’s preferable to turn off DR and control your exposure in camera rather than using the DR settings. Others may disagree.
DR modes in Fuji cameras just mean that the camera is underexposing and then increasing brightness to compensate for the darker image. It‘s convenient because you see the correctly exposed image on camera and your raw converter but you can bring back the clipped highlights. It‘s however exactly the same effect as underexposing manually and increasing exposure in the raw converter. In both cases the backside is increased noise.
When you process the raw images from Fuji, try converting them through DxO RAW3, and then bringing them into Lightroom. A huge difference in image quality and sharpness. I wonder how those files are compared to Leica afterwards. (Hello from Asturias - Northern Spain)
Dr400 is at the base iso of the sensor , or higher, lower iso is sintetic. The same applies to video, filmmaker understand better base iso and the influence of it on the image
Thanks for mentioning the DR function. I can’t speak for all amateur photographers, but I personally find this to be so helpful and is the single most powerful tool to avoid additional editing. I like using the DR400 for my Fujifilm. I would love a look into how the DR function (D-lighting) works for Nikon system. It seems to keep the base ISO and (in my opinion) does an even better job.
thanks for the video. is there any difference in dynamic range between full resolution Leica dng and dngs of smaller sizes? I ask because canon and sony suffer DR losses in medium and small raws.
So every camera has a set amount of Dynamic Range stops. however you are able to kinda choose whether you want those stops to occupy more of the shadows of an image or more of the highlights of an image by setting your ISO to different amounts. For example: if you're shooting in low light you actually want to keep your ISO LOWER because that allows you to retain higher dynamic range and detail in the shadows (this is how in cinema they are able to shoot scenes that look pretty much pitch black but still retain detail and don't have any noise). On the opposite end, if you're shooting a bright scene you actually want to use a higher (within reason) ISO because that places the camera's dynamic range stops closer to the highlights of the image therefore giving you more detail in the highlights kinda like what you showed on the demonstration of DR400. I'm sure Fuji also has the DR400 setting as the high dynamic range mode which adds to the whole higher ISO giving you more detail in the highlights. the TH-cam "Jimmy on Film" has a pretty good video explaining and demonstrating this called "Your ISO Settings Are Ruining Your Filmmaking".
I will soon have both cameras and I believe each has it's own use. The Q3 can be used for professional work, sometimes all on it's own. I did events only with it and it worked wonders. The fuji I will use mostly for street and casual travel. But so the Leica. Depends of what I feel like using :))
Increasing ISO generally shifts Dynamic Range to the highlights, which is why you have to increase ISO to access DR400 / 800. DR100 is meant for low light / controlled conditions where you don’t have as much contrast, and you need your dynamic range shifted to the shadows. It’s counter intuitive but that’s how 95% of camera sensors work.
Yes but this isn’t that. Regarding vide, raising your iso to base in flog would be enough on most cameras to maximize dynamic range, but on Fujis it will extend the range. Shooting photos with a Sony, Canon, Lumix or Nikon will provide full dynamic range at base ISOs, which are 100-200 and there is no way to “boost” it beyond that
@@stalman it’s not changing the DR, it’s merely shifting where the bias of the DR lies. Most sensors bias toward highlight in higher iso and shadows in lower iso. That would explain why you’re clipping in DR100 (iso 100-200) and properly exposing the exterior in DR400 (iso 400+). That would be my theory anyways. Of course, maybe there is more since this DR setting is not on other cameras.
They’re both great; inspiring and fun to use. (I’ve owned the earlier versions.) I took the original Q on a long motorcycle trip, which worked out fine, although the x100 would be better, in a way, both for its smaller size as well as the lower cost in case anything happens to it.
DR400 Answered. As I understand it DR 200 and DR 400 Basically Take multiple photos. The reason the ISO needs up is because it is taking the shadows from those exposures and highlights from a lower ISO. You do lose a little bit of detail at DR 400. However most never see it. Doing it all in the background in real time makes it hard to wrap my head around. Now if they could just make clarity work with out having to wait for the black out.
Wanted to weigh in on the DR400 topic. It has been known that these modern hybrid sensors always work better when they are giving a base ISO that isn't too low because if you shoot at too low of a ISO you don't have much latitude to pull back, but if you are at a higher ISO you are given more information to dial back to. This just shows that these hybrid sensors are now are now better utilized at a ISO 400 or 800, same as you would if you were shooting video.
Some day I will have a Leica but the compact size, built-in flash, ND filter and color recipes just make the X100VI such a great choice for how I'd use it. I really wish other companies understood the appeal of these cameras and gave us an option that was somewhere between $1500 and $6000 (and also actually available for purchase).
Also I'm sure someone else mentioned this but if you hold the EVF/OVF switch for a second it activates the ND filter so you can assign the custom button to something else.
Regarding the DRxxx settings: I thought for some reason, but can't find a reference right now, that Fuji had given the explanation of this being a bit of a dual ISO dealio. Not dual base ISO as like with video settings, but more like a bit of built-in exposure stacking like the C70 or GH6 have
On the X100VI you just need to use the top wheels one time to put it in T mode, then put the iso on the small front wheel dial and shutter speed on the back wheel dial.
Excellent comparative review! However, there is one thing that I have to say I am skeptical about - "Because these are leaf shutters, you should store them flat". Seriously? Do you have any documentation to prove that? I would think Leica would have mentioned that in their documentation if that was the case. I think that must be just your preference and there is no truth to what you said about storing the cameras flat when not in use.
Same goes for any lens in long term storage. Aperture blades are lubricated and if they set too long with gravity pulling that lubricant in one direction it unevenly dries out certain blades, leading to a jam. It's not special to Leica even to leaf shutters, any circular blade that moves can have this problem.
An excellent review. I have both cameras and can't disagree with the comments. The x100vi is definitely sharper than the x100v and ive been very impressed with the outputs by comparison. The ND filter and the portability are massive positives in favour of the Fuji. Given the expense of the Q3 it also means that there are occasions where the x100vi feels the safer option and offers a more discrete shooting experience. For example, as a holiday / travel camera in particular it has advantages and it's easier to take on the work commute. The Q3 is by far the better camera and the build quality is much better - whilst the Fuji fits into the pocket it also feels a lot more flimsy and plastic compared to the Q3. The two cameras have personality and both are fun to use. I shoot with the Fuji in much the same way as a Leica range finder with reliance on manual / zone focusing and hence whilst i can't comment on the autofocus capabilities of the x100vi i certainly can't fault the manual focusing. All in all the x100vi is good value and a distinct upgrade on the x100v. I am privileged to own both the Q3 and the x100vi. The former is the 'better' camera but the x100vi certainly has its advantages.
I had an X-100V and I hated it. Fujifilm’s menus are annoying and frustrating. I got rid of it and went back to using my Canon 5D Mk IVs. I am going to buy a Q3, and I will use it every day. I used Hasselblads for 30 years, so the weight of a Q3 is nothing.
In the portraits of Anya and her mom, I would say the x100f is just slightly sharper than the x100vi. Of course the Q3 is the sharpest but, at this mid distance, the x100f held up very well.
Thank you for your excellent comparison! I saw the sharpness comparison between the VI and the Leica. However, compared to the V, is the extra detail/sharpness rendering of the VI due to the higher resolution/megapixel sensor OR is the lens actually upgraded from the lens in the V?
The X100F is not the "old X100", its 2 generations behind. I would know, I had to sell of my old X100V because it overheated very quickly and the video footage was useless as there was no stabilization.
I just find not many people are upgrading every generation, plus it shows the changes in lens since the V updated it. I do the same in my phone reviews
Appreciate the insight on the topic Tyler..thank you!....it's funny people have mentioned for that price point and "German engineering" you would think that they would have had the flip screen to be way more flush with the body, like the X100VI..Fuji is so seamless looking and feeling compared to the Q3..totally noticeable at the 4:29 mark..lol .its subtle obviously but the design could have been way better..maybe on the Q4..they will borrow some design cues from Fuji..haha
That was very interesting. I was watching another photographer make the comparison between the two camera, and he was struggling to convey why photographs of vegetables on a countertop would "pop" with the Leica with a three dimensionality, which the Fuji wouldn't. Your Macro dollhead comparison, and the tower telephoto both addressed that for me: I think there's just something computational that camera/lens combo is doing at resolved a granular "super-focus" right on the surfaces, while the Fuji is being...well. Every other digital camera. I want the Fuji because it just tugs at me in a memory of being a kid and "that's what dad's expensive camera looks like", but those "focus lock-on" experiments make me want to know more about how exactly the Leica is doing that. Thanks, Tyler!
I only shoot DR 400% as well. Also with video I do the same. For example choosing a flat colour profile like eterna in video with DR 400% will give you the same DR as shooting in Flog. Don’t know the actual science behind it, it feels like the camera is under exposing as you mentioned but at the same time I don’t see any trade off in performance. Just I have to shoot at a higher ISO which I am totally chill with
Yeah this is why I’d like some clarification from Fuji, DR400 seems like the obvious superior way to shoot but it’s treated like there’s a trade off in quality, but I don’t see it
@@stalman The trade off is that you have to shoot at a higher iso - obviously the noise difference between 125 and 500 isn't huge but it is still there
DR400 is two stops underexposed. Your DR400 photo at ISO 500 is actually an ISO 125 shot that Lightroom knows to pull up by two stops immediately on import.
even the leica q and q2 you can buy a few ricohs and fujis. i wish leica would offer a more entry level priced camera for those who want to experience their system but can't easily shell out 6k to 8k just to get into it. Heck where I live its hard to even find an option to rent for a day to even test it out. I get it their a higher end but it be nice if I could experience the glass.
you're not missing out on much, trust me. I've used and owned a bunch of leica glass, m10, q2, q3, m11 etc. At the end of the day, its about usability. I keep coming back to my old X100F and being amazed about its value proposition: the build quality for the price, the color science of the jpegs, and the portability. I'm no longer doing professional work, so having great jpegs straight out of camera is a blast.
As someone who shoots the Q and M series, as well as Fujifilm, this is, hands-down, the most factual and nuanced discussion in which these two cameras are compared and contrasted. Thank you.
The fact that the Fuji is even in the dame conversation as the Q3 says a lot about the Fuji.
Word!
Any camera can be in the discussion, as long as somebody starts and shares that discussion.
The point is, no matter how long you discuss, Leica will always be miles ahead of Fuji in every possible way. EVERY SINGLE WAY.
@@kubowich The Leica Q3 doesn’t have a built in ND filter while the X100VI does. So there’s at least one thing the Fuji does better. Furthermore many people would choose Fuji straight out of camera colors over Leicas any day. If anything this comparison shows that paying the Leica tax gets you diminishing returns. I own two Leicas, great cameras, but 100% overpriced compared to other offerings out there from different brands. Dollar for dollar the Fuji is by far the winner when you consider how much you pay for the results you get.
@@kubowich Except when it comes to ND filters. Leica is late to the party on that one.
@@Wazhadnin-wj5te Imagine seeing the 28 summilux which can do proper hard stop manual focus and Autofocus attached to a full frame sensor and thinking a ND filter is a dunk. Ignoring that you can simply put a ND filter on the Leica.
Fuji fanboys are the best 🤣🤣
X100v then spend £5000 on travel
Yep, my new X100VI is off on a tour of China in a few weeks. I guess I could have bought a Q3 and took a tent to West Wales instead at least the Q3 could stand the rain….
XE1 then spend 6000 on travel😂
That meant something in 2019…these days, enjoy your 2 weeks in Cancun
@@kubowich I just spend 10weeks on holiday in Europe for less than 2000. Drove through Sweden, Germany, France and Spain and even rented sn apartment for 1 month.
@@stayuntilforeveryou can BS yourself but please, don’t try this on me. You’ll spend 2000 on a monthly car rental + gas alone. I am from Europe so I have pretty much an idea how much things cost around here. 100 USD per tank of gas, 20-30 USD per meal…you get the picture. And that monthly rent thing :D hilarious. Did you rent a spot under a bridge?
The DR 400 comparison is blowing my mind! Well done sir
News to me as well, testing on my X100F this week, I'm curious what shooting in the day time at 800 will look like!
Normally I wouldn't run DR 400 because min ISO gets raised but with the ND filter, this is now possible.
Indeed this was interesting 🤔
Pretty sure pal2tech has a DR400 explainer but i can give it a go:
When you crank the ISO, the same amount of light is hitting the sensor - but the sensor basically amplifies the signal. When you shoot at DR400 at ISO 640, it exposes the image at 160 - 1/4 of what you specified - and then amplifies the signal 4x (400%) to 640.
What it does is then combine those two signals. It can do this in RAW because it’s working with analog signals to achieve this - not the digital file.
This is also *why* you have a high ISO requirement - it works at the base ISO and higher, which on the X trans 4 sensor in the X100V and my XT30 is 160 , and then multiplies it.
If there’s interest I might make a video, this is a very common question
Just learned something new, and you DEFINITELY need to make a video on this lol.
@@TopshelfJuniorhe is referencing a Pal2Tech video about DR400, it's on TH-cam right now
So I think you're right about boosting the signal, which is why the required ISO goes up, but I don't think it it blending two exposures. Red, Canon and others have these features and the results look distinctly different from a high latitude image. If it were a dual gain sensor like the Alexa or C70, that would have a similar effect but that's not the case with this fuji sensor.
Whatever it's doing, I love the results, but I would love even more to have a clear explanation from fuji.
Just rewatched the pal2tech video and seems like it’s actually using the min ISO (640 for 400% on my XT3 for example) or higher for the shadows and using a lower ISO for the highlights to avoid blowing them out.
@@razasnake That was my understanding. The magic is that the camera is adjusting the gain on separate parts of the sensor independently, pixel by pixel. I almost always use DR400 and I also use auto ISO quite a bit and I believe that the camera will adjust to 640 automatically if the dynamic range of the scene is high enough.
Hilarious that at 6:54 you just contradicted the entire strength of the Fuji system. You can do that all in camera, and once dialed in, not only have a full cohesive set of perfect JPEGs, but also save it into a profile. Throw the editing PC out the window and enjoy shooting! Fuji freed me from the headache of wasting time messing with RAW, and I shoot combined JPEG/RAW so the back up is there if I need it.
The thing is, for the price of the Leica you can have the X100VI and an additional medium format GFX that simply is far beyond the Leica in regards to utility potential. Great review!
I know that works for some people, I love the idea of an SOOC lifestyle, but I’ve never dialed in a jpeg look that I’m satisfied with. Maybe someday!
Had an X100v, sold it when I sold all my Fuji gear and switched to Sony for weddings , and picked up a Q2 for me. This was around 2 years ago. Sold the Q2 a month or so ago, and managed to snag an X100vi.
Used it for a few days and although I loved the V, after using the Q2 it just wasn’t the same for me anymore. Sold the X100vi, bought a Q3 and over the last week, realised I’ve made the right choice. I wanna take it everywhere with me, and if I didnt have weddings, I’d sell everything and just have the Q3. Incredible camera
Needed to hear that. Thx
Selling my Fuji gear for a Q3 as well. Can I ask how you managed to score a Q3 so quickly? I ordered from my local shop around 3 weeks ago, and probably have a few months to wait.
@@DavidHalleenhey!! Not sure where you are located but try the Leica store in meatpacking NYC
@@DavidHalleenI’m in UK, I got it directly from Leica UK
I have both .. x100vi and q3 … I agree completely much more enjoy using the Q3.. what I’m starting to miss is my Q2M .. sold that once I had Q3 … won’t sell Q3 til Q3M comes out or keep both 😂 …. I’m still keeping the X100vi for now because of built in flash and being so compact … I got rid of everything (Sony & Fuji) when got I Q2M .. It’s so nice just having the all in one compact camera
As an owner of both these cameras I can say that this is the most open-handed, informative, mature comparison of these cameras I've seen on TH-cam. Well done!
The elephant in the room is that the X100VI is far more portable than the Q3. Which is the main point of the X100VI- the best camera is the one you have on yourself at all times. Unfortunately, the Q3's massive fixed lens actually makes it less portable than most cameras. Coupled with that extreme price tag, you're far more likely to take out X100VI and get more use out of it.
Calling the Q3 lens massive is a stretch. It’s not a pancake lens like the Fuji, but for full frame fast lenses, it’s quite compact. But I see what you’re saying.
Yeah I both agree and don’t. It’s definitely not as compact, but in practical they fit in the same bags and very compact compared to most pro camera systems.
But it’s still a W for the Fuji
@@ibradeybunch I disagree, It's larger than most fuji primes. But more importantly, you can't take the lens off which results in you having to carefully carry a weird triangle shape around all day. The magic of the X100 is its portability, what's the point of the Q3 when it's more inconvenient than than your go to Mirrorless or DSLR camera?
@@stalman Yea I see your point, but in a bag I'd be a bit worried about damaging the Q3 lens unless you had exactly the right space for that shape. I think as a concept it doesn't work, but people still love it because its autofocus digital Leica. Just not the best comparison between use cases for cameras.
@@sssf55 I carried a Q around several foreign countries like Finland, Mozambique, South Africa. It was not awkward or uncomfortable to carry around all day. The difference between carrying a Q and an X100 is slight in reality. The main difference for me is 35mm vs 28mm as a field of view.
Nd filter you can activate with the evf/ovf selector if you hold on for 3 seconds. You can use the fn button for another use.
Good tip, thanks.
I have both cameras as well, and I use them for very different purposes. Like you said, Tyler, the X100 lives in the pocket of the jacket, or you wear it around your torso, to be there 100% of the time, ready to shoot amazingly rendered creative colors. The Q3 is on another level, meaning it does shoot for the most digitally accurate representation, regarding sharpness, contrast, and color, so it’s not for everyday shooting. It’s for that landscape/posed photo that you know you need all the data to work on it after the fact. But there’s one huge difference where the Fuji is king: software. So many times, my Q3 hung and failed because of software, not to mention the loss of photos because of that. That never happened to me on all the 4 X100s I owned. The recent Q3 update fixed a lot of issues, but then again, that update should have been the one released from day one, meaning they have issues with it. Finally, after contacting Leica and looking under the hood at the Leica app, the Q3 accepts .CUBE files to render on camera, like the Lumix cameras do, but just not officially. If that becomes a trend, the X100 series will have some tough competition. Great video as always!
Sorry, can you clarify the .CUBE file thing? Is there a tutorial for that?
@@bsmayerr the Leica Q3 has something called Looks, that you can upload from the app to the camera. Under the hood, it's .CUBE files, that are packaged with the app that the camera gets once you decide to upload it. I asked Leica if they would ever open that API part of the app to devs (like myself), and they said: "Not for now..."
@@schmitzoide If they ever do that, I can see a lot of people using it. I mean, the Looks they provided with the Q3 are kinda Meh in my opinion. But if they ever allow users to upload custom looks through the app, that would be huge!
Ive had a Q3 since beginning October 2023, I usually just shoot events so come back with easily 1k shots or more per event. I ‘ve take taken well over 10k photos with Q3, it never had any issues with it freezing or losing a file. I’ve always used Sandisk Extreme Pro 300mb UHS II 256gb and 128gb. Same card with my Q2M never an issue. I did have issues with X100vi freezing on me while shooting an event when I first got. Figured out reason was because I was shooting in bracket mode for film simulation, camera was not only making 3 different jpegs but also 3 raw files too, UHS I couldn’t handle that
@@casadelouie I have taken not even 3000, and lost about 10 of them, even ones that have a gray half bottom that sent to Leica where they promised a software update that would fix that (that eventually came out). I have 12k photos taken between the first edition of the X100, the 2nd, 5th and now 6th. No failures. Always used the recommended cards for both models. 🤷
Dont worry about laying your camera flat for the leaf shutter, that was a problem with the older Medium Format leaf shutters since they were so heavy and the mechanisms werent as robust as they are today.
The modern leaf shutters are made with vertical storage in mind since the 2000s, so store it anyway you want. It wont damage 👍
I had my X100 blades lock up after a couple years in storage, that’s why I make the recommendation.
But it goes for any lens that is being stored for a long time, aperture blades can lock up too
Dr400 is a must, have been using it since xt1 days, the extra dynamic range you got is impressive. I have never been impressed by smartphone dynamic range until iphone 15 pro, because the fuji is just as good as the iphone
Do u get dr400 automatically when you shoot raw ?
@@gurugamer8632 in a practical world, there is zero downside to the dr400, yes it even affects raw. a lot of these reviewers and recipe maker doesn't understand shit. when making recipe, there is practically zero reason they told us what dr or noise reduction to use.
DR settings are also applied to RAW files. It shoots underexposed photo, thus having a lot of room for highlights, and then it pushes the exposure digitally to make it look normal.
Maybe, but can you point me to any official Fuji documentation about this or all we all just guessing?
@@stalman Watch Pal2Tech's Understanding Dynamic Range Settings video. Per usual, he covers this thoroughly with examples. Agreed that Fujifilm could do much better at communicating what is actually happening (ISO is raised to allow underexposing by 1 or 2 stops, therefore protecting highlights, and midtones-shadows are boosted during the A-to-D conversion) and that it applies to both JPG and RAW files.
Edit: Even reading back my explanation would be confusing to the newcomer. Minimum ISO is raised. This gives the camera the room to drop the ISO during capture, thereby underexposing.
@@blankmelon There is also a color shift in the pictures when using the 400% Is better to leave the iso at 160 at push it raw. From what I can remember it does something to the RAW metadata in the file.
@@stalmanI don’t know if there are public documents, but folks have reversed engineered it by looking at the raw file and tags (looking at the raw file in Lightroom doesn’t count since it’s made to abstract these details away)
If you want to know more, Search for RawExposureBias. It’s metadata in the raw file that tells the image editor how underexposed the image is, thus how much gain the software should apply to compensate.
So the way software reads it, it loads the image, checks the bias and corrects the exposure- then that becomes the baseline 0ev for gain in the editor. Now, when you move the exposure slider back -2 ev, the software still has access to that highlight details.
What this also means though is if you increase the exposure by +2ev, the image with DR400 will probably look noisier in the shadows than a shot with DR100, since the image with DR100 probably had a slower shutter speed or wider aperture to let in more light since the ISO is lower
Every time I learn something new from your videos 🤯 by far the best comparison between the Q3 and X100VI.
For me, someone that also used both, the Q3 is by far higher quality in every aspect, but also less fun. It felt more like work.
FUJI: Vibe, Atmosphere, Street, experimental
Leica: Ads, Social Media, clean images
Great video!! But Sorry gotta roll my eyes on the leaf shutter store facing up tip. With all the leaf shutters I’ve used in 40 years in various lenses I’ve never heard this suggested nor have I had an issue
what’s the risk of storing it a different way?
if you move the lever on the front of the X100VI for 3 seconds it sets up the ND filter on and off, freeing up the function button. its a default setting for the X1006
I'll be honest-it doesn't make much sense to compare the Fuji X100 (any model) with the Leica Q3. I've always been a Canon guy myself, but getting the X100 is still on my to-do list. In my view, it's a small powerhouse with a built-in ND filter and a leaf shutter, eliminating limitations on sync speed with any flash. This makes the X100 a uniquely compact tool for portraits, and its size is a big plus. You can achieve pro-level results with it, elevating your off-camera flash photography indoors or outdoors to another level with very little kit of gear. Additionally, there are telephoto and wide extenders available if you need a longer reach or wider angle-50mm or 28mm, respectively. In some ways, the X100 can even serve as a backup hybrid camera with its 35mm field of view lens for the price of just 35mm lens for Canon or Sony systems. One more thing to note is that enjoying photography is as much about mindset as it is about gear-it's a mental aspect that can always be adjusted to the gear you already have!
Indeed.
ND, leaf shutter and flash sync at _any_ speed. Something the Leica and hardly any other cameras today can do. And all in a small package. Plus, having both an optical and electronic viewfinder is compelling as well.
Tyler. Not sure if you knew but you don’t have to map the top button to the nd filter. It’s already mapped out if the box to the viewfinder toggle. Simply hold it down for 3 seconds and it will activate the nd. Your welcome.
I didn’t think a fixed camera would ever be for me.. but since I got my x100vi I’ve hardly touched my Nikon Z8.. the convenience is a huge selling point.. the flash and nd filter are game changing also.. went to Dubai and it’s all I took with me and it was fantastic.
I hope to one day test a Leica to see what the fuss is but I don’t think with the price point i can be sold
Q3 macro is forced f/2.8, so the X100VI is at a bit of a disadvantage at macro distances at f/2 by comparison. Just stopping down the 100VI to f/2.2 makes a huge difference.
That’s a good point
I tried out both. I went with the VI. The Q3 only had a slightly wider FOV and slightly lower pixel density but the images from both were remarkably similar. The in-body stabilization on the VI vs the optical stabilization on the Q3 was also a big plus for the VI. And the VI is a lot lighter. I think you mentioned the cost difference, too. That also helped.
got my q3 in all places in dubai on a 1 day layover was the last one in stock they just got it in stock an hour ago from deliveries and picked it up. was nervous about dropping 6k but man..... i love that camera its all i use now. Having sonys, nikons, and fujis. Just because of the build quality the size and the colors and quality of glass is just unmatched. have a order for a fuji x100vi but keep getting pushed back by months...
I have a lot of Leica kit (including a Q3 43, digital CL, M11, M11 Monochrom, and SL2), but I played with a friend’s FujiFilm X100VI camera today, and I thought it was a very attractive camera.
Still not sure why the insistence on comparing these two cameras. They are quite different. The X100VI has an APS-C sensor; full frame for the Q3. Fuji is $1600; Leica is $6000. They both have their advantages and disadvantages including, unfortunately, both being back-ordered likely well into the future. I currently have a Fujifilm X100F, a Leica SL-2 and a Lumix G9. If I can snag one, I'd like to get the Leica D-lux 8 when it is released. In other words, infinite diversity in infinite combinations.
I’ve shot every generation of X100 since 2011 and have *never* heard of storing it lens up. Never had an issue with any of my cameras storing it ‘normal’ or sideways in a bag.
Also never had an issue with my decades old hasselblad 501c and any of its leaf shutter lenses.
Regarding DR, I have always shot Fujis at ISO400 with the increased dynamic range
I’ve had this happen exact issue, just google X100 jammed shutter
@@stalman I vaguely remember the sticky aperture blade problem from the original x100 and came across random posts of ‘stuck shutter buttons’, but nothing about how storing your camera affects either. What evidence do you have of that claim?
Your comparison is spot-on. A small comment though on your intuition about DR (7:33), while the DR400 setting does adjust exposure downward during capture and then compensates by boosting shadows and mid-tones, it's essential to note that reducing exposure in Lightroom doesn't directly alter the light hitting the sensor. This setup is ideal for JPG shooting but compromises image quality in raw files. DR400 effectively reduces dynamic range by almost 2 stops, visible mainly in shadow areas. While Fuji's processing enhances JPGs with noise reduction and shadow boost, it sacrifices raw file potential. You can easily replicate it by underexposing your pictures 1 or 2 stops at minimum iso and then boosting midtones and shadows, although, the precise curve fuji uses is quite elusive.
Great review Tyler but you forgot to mention a very very important feature on Fujifilm X100VI, which is Hybrid Viewfinder! I am using X100F and Hybrid Viewfinder is the main reason that I love this camera. It's a very unique technology and well implemented in this compact camera. If you switch off LCD screen and only use Hybrid Viewfinder, you can shoot all day with its little battery. Besides there is a lens hood for Fujifilm X100VI, which is little and neat.
The DR settings are just baking in some tone curve manipulation, I tested the settings last year with my Xyla 21 to have a good handle on what it's doing. If you are ok with slightly noisier shadows, but gain a stop or two of highlight information, then it's totally worth it.
That would make sense and is probably the most likely explanation, but what variable is it changing to capture the lower exposure of the DR400 image? Obviously the shutter and aperture are what they are, so behind the scenes it’s using a lower ISO to save the highlights, but showing a higher ISO in the raw data?
It could be, but I would love to get confirmation
@@stalman Yes, so it's just a metadata tag to the file and that tag tells the file what tone curve to attach to it. So the camera uses a low or base ISO and then the tone curve itself they use just mimics what the brightness of the shadows and midtowns would be if it were actually exposed at a higher ISO and since it's all their software architecture and they know how they are metering/calculating, etc. it's pretty accurate. The tone curve is pretty straightforward and easy to reproduce, so you could use it on other raw images or create a custom camera color profile with the same tone curve if you wanted to be able to have a similar experience with other camera brands.
Hey Tyler - thanks for the great video.
The DR400 under exposes by 2 stops and then brightens it back up in camera by those two stops and saves the highlights that way. The ISO shown is actually reflects the comparative ISO after it's been brought up by 2 stops.
In order to compare the DR100 and DR400 you need to underexpose the DR100 by 2 stops and then raise it back up again in LR - I expect you will see the similar results when doing things that way.
Shooting RAW at DR400 is the same as shooting DR100 with -2 exposure comp all except the way the image will be displayed afterwards on the back screen and the starting point with lightroom. The RAW data is still the same.
The real advantage of this is when shooting Jpeg since it allows you some of the Dynamic range advantages of RAW while shooting JPEG.
That’s my guess too but can you find any official Fuji info about it? Seems weird that we all just need to figure it out
And the advantage is there in raw too, because underexposing by 2 stops is a miserable way to shoot
Is it me or does that just expose the limitation of this sensor? Sony sensors for example get full dynamic range (several stops more than DR400) from the non extended range of ISO, why do we need to bump up the ISO to 800 on Fuji to get a measly 11 stops is it of dynamic range?
If i shoot in bright daylight the raw Dynamic Range at 160 or 120 iso is totally enough for me. When there is massive highlights that i want to recover, i shoot in HDR 800+ in Fuji and somehow it has the best Dynamic range I've seen because it affects the raw files as well
If that were the case why would it need to be shot at 2x base iso?
From what I have been lead to believe it exposes highlights at 2 stops lower than it exposes the shadows and merges them somehow? I may be wrong but I don't understand if its only boosting an underexposed image why it would need to shoot at ISO 500 min.
@@tobiahtayo5149 it’s to do with how ISO works. The same amount of light hits the sensor regardless of ISO. It then amplifies the signal off the sensor to get to your target ISO. Assuming a base ISO of 160, for example, an exposure at ISO 640 is effectively a shot at 160, amplified 4x (2 stops) to land at 640. This is an analog process, as I understand it, so the base signal and amplified signal sit on top of each other and get saved in the digital file.
If you ask it to shoot DR400, you’re asking it to amplify the signal 4x - but it can’t do that below 4x the base ISO, it doesn’t math.
I have been using Fuji film cameras since 2014.
In layman’s terms - it reduces highlights by 2 stops with the 400% and 1 stop with the 200% on RAW images too not just the in camera Jpegs, it’s baked in helps when shooting high contrast scenes.
With respect to the base ISO it’s different between the medium format vs the aps-C format & the camera’s base ISO.
Medium format 1 stop - 200% - 200iso
Medium format 2stops - 400% - 400iso
I don’t recollect how much it was on the APS-C cameras.
Q3 far superior with NO question, but if you afraid to pick it up, carry it with you everywhere - what's the point?
You get to say that you have one and make videos to flex it haha
The luxury of buying/owning an expensive item > the luxury of actually using the item in this case 😂
@@SamEmilio2 hahahaha..
Thanks! Nicely done. I have the Fuji XT5, the Q2M, and the iPhone 14 right now and I’m very happy with my gear and my range! I’ll keep following you! Geoff
I have a Q2 and was shocked how solid/high quality the X100VI feels. It’s no Leica …. But I borrowed a X100V and it felt like a toy. No idea why.
Be aware of the X100VI and its focusing abilities on near infinity distances. I have the X100VI and I love it. But, on a recent assignment, I came home with 35 images in a row of a stationary object - all out of focus. I felt that something was wrong the I was shooting and kept shooting and re-focusing. However, I still didn't get a single image with correct focus. This problem also occurs with wide angles on X-H2.
Another note: The Leica Q is equipped with a 25mm lens that is cropped in to 28mm. This gives you a different compression than if it had been a straight 28mm.
For me the X100vi became a totally different camera after I started shooting JPEG with the film presets. I absolutely love it. The Leica's (M11 in my case) beats the Fuji hands down in RAW.
Just wish the X100vi had 30 or so custom settings to have a bunch of classic films and then room for some experimental films.
DR400 ... like the D Range Priority option ... is using the separate Highlight and Shadow options, to help with DR.
Tip, if you hold the EVF/OVF switch to the right for few seconds it enables and disables the ND out of the box. Easier to reach and you can use the other button for something else.
Great tip, I hadn’t noticed
Dear Tyler, here’s what I think is going on with the DR settings:
Modern camera sensors are (mostly) ISO-less. This means that technically speaking the RAW data from the sensor should be able to have any selectable ISO setting applied afterwards. Unfortunately, all camera manufactuers are not transparent about this (see Tony Northrups video about it)
When you set ISO 100 in camera, to achieve a ‘normal’ exposure on the meter, your exposure settings needed will deliver more light, leading to faster highlight blowout. If you raise the in camera ISO and compensate your SS/Iris, you will deliver the sensor less light overall. this should mean highlight detail is retained more. Where we get into speculation is what Fujifilm is doing in DR400 setting to achieve the same overall ‘exposure’ just with more highlight detail. But it makes sense why this should work, if the fujifilm sensors are overall more sensitive to highlight overexposure.
It's actually really weird (interesting) that there is a "ISO Bracketing" on Fuji cameras. It takes only ONE image, but it produces 3 RAW files with different ISO. You'd think it will take 3 images using different ISO say ISO 100, 200 and 400 but it doesn't. Camera only shoots once. How does it work? I don't know, but I think there's something similar going on here with DR400.
@@stinka17 that’s a very interesting clue!
As with shooting transparency film in the old days, shooting JPEG will teach you more about proper exposure than RAW processing can. It removes the crutch of RAW (you siad you "always add some presets" in processing your RAW files).
Learn the camera's capabilities shooting JPEG and you have more photography time, less computer time.
In DR400, the camera is taking the photo at an actual ISO of -2 EV. So when you shot at ISO 500 with DR400, it was actually captured with the sensor gain at ISO 125 and the camera boost the shadows and midtones in camera and baked into the RAW files. In contrast, when you shot at ISO 500 with DR100, it was shot with the sensor gain set at actual ISO 500. Other cameras can do this too BUT they don't bake it into the raw file. Instead, it's just metadata that your software may or may not acknowledge. For example, if I use a similar feature on my Nikon Z (Active D-Lighting), some tone sliders will be adjusted already when I import the RAW file in Lightroom. The beauty in Fujifilm's implementation is it makes the sliders on the editing app much more powerful in highlight recovery. The only downside is possible more noise and loss of detail in the shadows and mids but they hardly matter as the in-camera processing is very good and looks natural. I always have it on my GFX and on my X-Series cameras when I still had one.
This is the best Fuji and Leica comparison video I've seen so far.
That DR400 vs DR100 setting difference was shocking! That’s a really fascinating difference
8:09 dude… had no idea. Thank you for bringing this to light!
Interesting to note that the Q3 is leaf shutter... I would think that type of shutter would have problems quickly closing and then opening and closing for the actual exposure, as it has to with an evf. I would think that the Fuji shutter would wear much more slowly when using the ovf. Shut-open-shut in quick succession seems like a lot more stress than open-shut, it would be interesting to know if this is actually the case.
The Fuji owner's manual says nothing about storing the camera flat due to the leaf shutter. I have a Mamiya 7 with 3 (leaf shutter) lenses and that says nothing about storage orientation either.
All lens and shutter blades are lubricated and in regular use, it stays evening distributed. If those blades sit vertically without moving for a long period, gravity can gradually dry some of the blades and cause sticking. Whether your instructions say it or not, it’s a thing that happens and I’ve run into.
It's interesting what you say about the best position to store digital cameras with leaf shutter. I had never read that they should not be stored vertically, I imagine you mean if they are stored for very long periods of time.
Well if you plan to keep your camera for a long time, the more it spends on its front or back, the less chance it will jam
And I say this because it’s happened to me
The X100V has the same lens as the X100VI. It’s also been demonstrated that the lens isn’t capable of taking full advantage of the 40mp sensor.
Yeah a deal breaker for me
one thing often gets lost in translation when reviewing Leica (Hasselblad, etc.) camera gear vs. traditional consumer/prosumer gear. i spend a lot of time in the audiophile community as well, and an important thing to learn quickly is: you are only the customer of a product when you can purchase it and not notice the difference in your bank account - regardless of if it costs $100, $1,000, or $10,000. The same is absolutely true here. If $6K for a fixed-lens camera sounds like anger-inducing absurdity, remember: you are not the customer.
thanks for the comparison and sharing your thoughts! both of these cameras are beautiful. appreciate your insights.
That’s a good way to put it, I think that’s the source of anger towards a lot of expensive products. I know the price of a Neumann would be lost on me, but I’m still happy they exist
Your observation about storing the camera is intriguing. I didn't come across any mention of it in the manual, but it's good to be aware of. Additionally, the camera was positioned this way in the box
I learned this the hard way
@@stalman Were you able to unstuck them or had to send for repair? How "old" was your camera when this happened? Thanks
@@juantasticothat doesn't happen with modern leaf shutters, it has been fixed since the 2000s. It was an issue for older MF leaf shutters since they were so big and the mechanisms less robust. Shouldn't be a problem for today's shutters so store away 😊
@@CallMeRabbitzUSVI Thanks also what I thought !
The Fuji is an ok camera with an average Pancake lens that can't resolve that resolution and you can't replace. The Leica Q is a 3 thousand dollar camera that you buy for 6 thousand dollars. And you can't change the lens.
Some people would say that the Q is a Leica M+28mm Summilux for half the price :)
As someone who jumped from a x100v (not vi) to a Q3, I can say with confidence that the Fuji x100v line and the Leica Q line are perfect examples of the Pareto principle. You can achieve 80% with the Fuji, but for the remaining 20% you have to go into the (expensive) Leica rabbit hole.
One additional point, which is often missed in such comparisons: there is nearly no 3rd Party aftermarket for Leica. You want a 2nd battery? Grab an official one for 170 €…
hey i'm not sure if you're still responding to comments on here but i've never heard that it's better to lay the camera down because of the leaf shutter. do you have any resources or links with more information on this? i have never heard this and couldn't find anything when google searching. i just see people asking whether or not it's better to leave the shutter cocked. i also haven't heard anybody else mention it when talking about the x100 series.
Just got my X100vi, and your video is the best I've seen so far at explaining nuances. Thought I should wanted to thank you for that.
Oh! I didn't know about the DR400 setting. That's huge.
Finally u r making videos about Leica❤️
Can u plz make youtube videos about film photography, cuz film isn’t dead and i would love to see that content from u 🎞️🎞️
Thanks so much! I’ve got all these notes about a film video but I just haven’t got around to it
*(almost) NOBODY talks about DR200 and 400, and even less people talk about Dynamic Range priority, which is INCREDIBLE and makes an enourmous difference in both film sims, and also preserving shadows or highlights in otherwise impossible situations.
If only the Q3 came with a 50mm lens option. The 28mm is wide for what I like to shoot.
I would love to carry a wide and medium Q3 at all times
@@stalman
And now you can, with the Q3 43.
But man, that takes a very fat wallet to do and maybe even a security guard escort!
You can definitely see the increased resolution and sharpness around the eyes. It is surely a significant boost.
7:04
been shooting dr400 at 640 iso since 2020! game changer. This is how sensors should have been designed from the start instead of clipping highlights, the OPPOSITE of how traditional film responds.
If the Leica M11 had this feature, it would be the perfect camera. Especially the monochrom edition that already had a great high Iso response.
My thoughts on Fuji DR settings. If you only shoot jpeg, the DR settings (DR200 or DR400) can be a useful way to preserve your highlights. But the DR settings definitely do affect the raw files, as the DR settings basically underexpose the image in camera. So if you only shoot raw, I’d suggest you turn off DR (ie set to DR100), turn on the blinkies and protect your highlights in camera (using manual control or the exposure compensation dial). If you shoot both jpeg and raw, I still think it’s preferable to turn off DR and control your exposure in camera rather than using the DR settings. Others may disagree.
Yeah I would much rather an accurate preview of my final raw image than always shooting 2 stops under and guessing what I might have captured
DR modes in Fuji cameras just mean that the camera is underexposing and then increasing brightness to compensate for the darker image. It‘s convenient because you see the correctly exposed image on camera and your raw converter but you can bring back the clipped highlights. It‘s however exactly the same effect as underexposing manually and increasing exposure in the raw converter. In both cases the backside is increased noise.
When you process the raw images from Fuji, try converting them through DxO RAW3, and then bringing them into Lightroom. A huge difference in image quality and sharpness. I wonder how those files are compared to Leica afterwards. (Hello from Asturias - Northern Spain)
Or capture one
Dr400 is at the base iso of the sensor , or higher, lower iso is sintetic. The same applies to video, filmmaker understand better base iso and the influence of it on the image
How do VIEWFINDERS compare? and differentiate
Thanks for mentioning the DR function. I can’t speak for all amateur photographers, but I personally find this to be so helpful and is the single most powerful tool to avoid additional editing. I like using the DR400 for my Fujifilm. I would love a look into how the DR function (D-lighting) works for Nikon system. It seems to keep the base ISO and (in my opinion) does an even better job.
thanks for the video.
is there any difference in dynamic range between full resolution Leica dng and dngs of smaller sizes?
I ask because canon and sony suffer DR losses in medium and small raws.
I thought @pal2tech explains the behavior fir DR 100,200,400 in his video „Fujifilm Dynamic Range Settings“ quite well.
Thanks for mentioning him, I have watched them before and might need to go back. No other camera brands work this way
Yes, he's very good with Fuji. He has a separate video on the dynamic range priority setting as well.
Great video, just quick question do you use any filter on your Q3???
So every camera has a set amount of Dynamic Range stops. however you are able to kinda choose whether you want those stops to occupy more of the shadows of an image or more of the highlights of an image by setting your ISO to different amounts. For example: if you're shooting in low light you actually want to keep your ISO LOWER because that allows you to retain higher dynamic range and detail in the shadows (this is how in cinema they are able to shoot scenes that look pretty much pitch black but still retain detail and don't have any noise). On the opposite end, if you're shooting a bright scene you actually want to use a higher (within reason) ISO because that places the camera's dynamic range stops closer to the highlights of the image therefore giving you more detail in the highlights kinda like what you showed on the demonstration of DR400. I'm sure Fuji also has the DR400 setting as the high dynamic range mode which adds to the whole higher ISO giving you more detail in the highlights. the TH-cam "Jimmy on Film" has a pretty good video explaining and demonstrating this called "Your ISO Settings Are Ruining Your Filmmaking".
I will soon have both cameras and I believe each has it's own use. The Q3 can be used for professional work, sometimes all on it's own. I did events only with it and it worked wonders. The fuji I will use mostly for street and casual travel. But so the Leica. Depends of what I feel like using :))
Increasing ISO generally shifts Dynamic Range to the highlights, which is why you have to increase ISO to access DR400 / 800. DR100 is meant for low light / controlled conditions where you don’t have as much contrast, and you need your dynamic range shifted to the shadows.
It’s counter intuitive but that’s how 95% of camera sensors work.
Yes but this isn’t that. Regarding vide, raising your iso to base in flog would be enough on most cameras to maximize dynamic range, but on Fujis it will extend the range. Shooting photos with a Sony, Canon, Lumix or Nikon will provide full dynamic range at base ISOs, which are 100-200 and there is no way to “boost” it beyond that
@@stalman it’s not changing the DR, it’s merely shifting where the bias of the DR lies. Most sensors bias toward highlight in higher iso and shadows in lower iso. That would explain why you’re clipping in DR100 (iso 100-200) and properly exposing the exterior in DR400 (iso 400+).
That would be my theory anyways. Of course, maybe there is more since this DR setting is not on other cameras.
They’re both great; inspiring and fun to use. (I’ve owned the earlier versions.) I took the original Q on a long motorcycle trip, which worked out fine, although the x100 would be better, in a way, both for its smaller size as well as the lower cost in case anything happens to it.
DR400 Answered. As I understand it DR 200 and DR 400 Basically Take multiple photos. The reason the ISO needs up is because it is taking the shadows from those exposures and highlights from a lower ISO. You do lose a little bit of detail at DR 400. However most never see it. Doing it all in the background in real time makes it hard to wrap my head around. Now if they could just make clarity work with out having to wait for the black out.
That clarity loading is the worst part of Fuji cameras. I'll never use clarity adjustment because of that fking loading lol
@@f.iph7291 Right Might as well shoot raw and use a preset. LOL
@@fuelediowa god forbid a customer to see that loading and thinks your gear is antique and slow lol
Wanted to weigh in on the DR400 topic. It has been known that these modern hybrid sensors always work better when they are giving a base ISO that isn't too low because if you shoot at too low of a ISO you don't have much latitude to pull back, but if you are at a higher ISO you are given more information to dial back to. This just shows that these hybrid sensors are now are now better utilized at a ISO 400 or 800, same as you would if you were shooting video.
Some day I will have a Leica but the compact size, built-in flash, ND filter and color recipes just make the X100VI such a great choice for how I'd use it. I really wish other companies understood the appeal of these cameras and gave us an option that was somewhere between $1500 and $6000 (and also actually available for purchase).
Also I'm sure someone else mentioned this but if you hold the EVF/OVF switch for a second it activates the ND filter so you can assign the custom button to something else.
If you use shutterspeed on A then how could other cameras possibly feel like work? Setting your exposure is then no different to the other cameras.
Regarding the DRxxx settings: I thought for some reason, but can't find a reference right now, that Fuji had given the explanation of this being a bit of a dual ISO dealio. Not dual base ISO as like with video settings, but more like a bit of built-in exposure stacking like the C70 or GH6 have
On the X100VI you just need to use the top wheels one time to put it in T mode, then put the iso on the small front wheel dial and shutter speed on the back wheel dial.
Interesting conversation on the sharpness. Can you get close by tweaking the sharpness setting on film simulation?
In an old video of his Cam Mackey said to use iso 640 on Fuji to get the most out of the dynamic range on dynamic range 400
Each body is rated for a different ISO so it depends who can version you’re using. The newer ones keep lowering the DR400 iso requirement
Excellent comparative review! However, there is one thing that I have to say I am skeptical about - "Because these are leaf shutters, you should store them flat". Seriously? Do you have any documentation to prove that? I would think Leica would have mentioned that in their documentation if that was the case. I think that must be just your preference and there is no truth to what you said about storing the cameras flat when not in use.
Same goes for any lens in long term storage. Aperture blades are lubricated and if they set too long with gravity pulling that lubricant in one direction it unevenly dries out certain blades, leading to a jam. It's not special to Leica even to leaf shutters, any circular blade that moves can have this problem.
If mine ever arrives, I'll test the DR 400 as well
The LEICA Q3 is brutally way superior to the X100VI, it crashes the Fuji.
No it doesn’t. I bet you’ve no experience of either.
An excellent review. I have both cameras and can't disagree with the comments. The x100vi is definitely sharper than the x100v and ive been very impressed with the outputs by comparison. The ND filter and the portability are massive positives in favour of the Fuji. Given the expense of the Q3 it also means that there are occasions where the x100vi feels the safer option and offers a more discrete shooting experience. For example, as a holiday / travel camera in particular it has advantages and it's easier to take on the work commute. The Q3 is by far the better camera and the build quality is much better - whilst the Fuji fits into the pocket it also feels a lot more flimsy and plastic compared to the Q3. The two cameras have personality and both are fun to use. I shoot with the Fuji in much the same way as a Leica range finder with reliance on manual / zone focusing and hence whilst i can't comment on the autofocus capabilities of the x100vi i certainly can't fault the manual focusing. All in all the x100vi is good value and a distinct upgrade on the x100v. I am privileged to own both the Q3 and the x100vi. The former is the 'better' camera but the x100vi certainly has its advantages.
Having used both to photograph a gig last night the Q3 wins hands down in low light. Ultimately you pay for the better lens.
I had an X-100V and I hated it. Fujifilm’s menus are annoying and frustrating. I got rid of it and went back to using my Canon 5D Mk IVs.
I am going to buy a Q3, and I will use it every day. I used Hasselblads for 30 years, so the weight of a Q3 is nothing.
In the portraits of Anya and her mom, I would say the x100f is just slightly sharper than the x100vi. Of course the Q3 is the sharpest but, at this mid distance, the x100f held up very well.
Thank you for your excellent comparison! I saw the sharpness comparison between the VI and the Leica. However, compared to the V, is the extra detail/sharpness rendering of the VI due to the higher resolution/megapixel sensor OR is the lens actually upgraded from the lens in the V?
great video. as clean as always. That DR400 just opened my eyes. will try it out on my XT1 and XT2
I'd love to see how the A7C2 and A7CR compares between these 2. Similar in size and megapixels.
Yeah me too, I’ve been wanting to spend some time with a C
@@stalman I'm hoping to get my hands on one soon!
The X100F is not the "old X100", its 2 generations behind. I would know, I had to sell of my old X100V because it overheated very quickly and the video footage was useless as there was no stabilization.
I just find not many people are upgrading every generation, plus it shows the changes in lens since the V updated it. I do the same in my phone reviews
Appreciate the insight on the topic Tyler..thank you!....it's funny people have mentioned for that price point and "German engineering" you would think that they would have had the flip screen to be way more flush with the body, like the X100VI..Fuji is so seamless looking and feeling compared to the Q3..totally noticeable at the 4:29 mark..lol .its subtle obviously but the design could have been way better..maybe on the Q4..they will borrow some design cues from Fuji..haha
That was very interesting. I was watching another photographer make the comparison between the two camera, and he was struggling to convey why photographs of vegetables on a countertop would "pop" with the Leica with a three dimensionality, which the Fuji wouldn't. Your Macro dollhead comparison, and the tower telephoto both addressed that for me: I think there's just something computational that camera/lens combo is doing at resolved a granular "super-focus" right on the surfaces, while the Fuji is being...well. Every other digital camera.
I want the Fuji because it just tugs at me in a memory of being a kid and "that's what dad's expensive camera looks like", but those "focus lock-on" experiments make me want to know more about how exactly the Leica is doing that.
Thanks, Tyler!
I only shoot DR 400% as well. Also with video I do the same. For example choosing a flat colour profile like eterna in video with DR 400% will give you the same DR as shooting in Flog. Don’t know the actual science behind it, it feels like the camera is under exposing as you mentioned but at the same time I don’t see any trade off in performance. Just I have to shoot at a higher ISO which I am totally chill with
Yeah this is why I’d like some clarification from Fuji, DR400 seems like the obvious superior way to shoot but it’s treated like there’s a trade off in quality, but I don’t see it
@@stalman The trade off is that you have to shoot at a higher iso - obviously the noise difference between 125 and 500 isn't huge but it is still there
DR400 is two stops underexposed. Your DR400 photo at ISO 500 is actually an ISO 125 shot that Lightroom knows to pull up by two stops immediately on import.
even the leica q and q2 you can buy a few ricohs and fujis. i wish leica would offer a more entry level priced camera for those who want to experience their system but can't easily shell out 6k to 8k just to get into it. Heck where I live its hard to even find an option to rent for a day to even test it out. I get it their a higher end but it be nice if I could experience the glass.
you're not missing out on much, trust me. I've used and owned a bunch of leica glass, m10, q2, q3, m11 etc. At the end of the day, its about usability. I keep coming back to my old X100F and being amazed about its value proposition: the build quality for the price, the color science of the jpegs, and the portability. I'm no longer doing professional work, so having great jpegs straight out of camera is a blast.
Have you played with the Ricoh GR iiix at all? Interested to hear opinions on that in comparison to these
I would love to spend time with it, but I’d love even more to see Ricoh update it
Why a V60 card for Fuji when it's UHS-I ?
Hoping we get that answer, because I had the same question and am looking to gram some cards for my VI.
@@jacquesgude the only benefit is the downloading of the images to a computer is much faster if you have a compatible reader.
Can’t the Fuji do 6.3k? Not just 4K?
I think the DR400 thing is tied into ISO indifference. The sweet spot is ISO640