Fujifilm XF1 review: Stylish, creative controls and image quality amongst the best compacts

By Paul Carroll - Thursday, March 07, 2013

Camera Review
Introduction | Fujifilm XF1 sensor performance | Fujifilm XF1 versus competition | Conclusion

Fujifilm XF1 vs. Canon PowerShot S110 vs. Nikon Coolpix P7700: 2/3-inch sensor takes on smaller 1/1.7-inch competitors

As well as all compact cameras, the XF1’s direct challengers are the higher-end compacts in the Canon S, Panasonic LX, Olympus XZ and Nikon P product lines. We’ve picked out a comparison for each.

A DxOMark Sensor Score of 49 ranks Fujifilm’s first compact in the XF product line as having the same image quality as popular compacts such as the $399 Nikon Coolpix P7700 and $449 Canon PowerShot S110.

Versus the P7700, the Nikon compact just nudges out the XF1 with a +1/3rd of a Stop improvement for Color Depth, at 21.1 bits to 20.5 bits at base ISO, and ½ of a Stop for Dynamic Range, 11.7Evs to 11.2Evs.

 The best Dynamic Range scores are achieved at the minimum ISO however, which, in the case of the XF1, is at a measured ISO of 106 compared to 71 on the P7700, giving the Nikon compact an advantage ; but at the manufacturer ISO of ISO 200 there’s very little in it however.

The same can be said for Sports (Low-light ISO) Scores, where ISO results of 199 ISO for the XF1, compared to 191 ISO for the P7700, are very similar despite the fact the Nikon utilizes the slightly smaller 1/1.7-inch sensor.

Against the Canon PowerShot S110, the XF1 has almost identical Color Depth and Dynamic Range results as well; despite the fact the Canon compact has a lower minimum ISO of 80. The smaller 1/1.7-inch sensor on the PowerShot S110 doesn’t hold up quite as well for noise however, and the Fujifilm XF1 offers a +1/3 of a stop improvement for Low-light ISO.

Fujifilm-XF1-dynamic1

A win of +1/2 of a Stop for the P7700 only applies at the base sensitivity where the Nikon’s measured base ISO is 71 compared to 106 for the XF1 and from ISO 200 Dynamic Range is the same for all three cameras.

Fujifilm-XF1-color1

Again the P7700 has the edge at the minimum sensitivity but from ISO 100 onwards the Fujifilm XF1 has a slight edge over both the Nikon and Canon competitors for Dynamic Range.

Fujifilm XF1 vs. Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs. Lumix DMC LX7: Not just a pretty face, the XF1 image quality delivers too

With a DxOMark Overall Score of 49, the 1st Compact and new XF product line for Fujifilm offers the same level of image quality as popular enthusiast compacts like the $599 Olympus XZ-2 and Panasonic $448 LX7.

Although practically the same image quality overall, there are some small differences as you drill-down in to the detail.

For Color Depth scoring 20.5 bits (XF1), 20.4 bits (XZ-2 iHS), and 20.7 bits (LX7), the Panasonic model does just have the edge at base ISO, but the difference is marginal in real world terms, and in fact as sensitivity is increased over ISO 100, both the XZ-2 iHS and XF1 offer +1/3 of Stop better Color Depth than the LX7.

For Landscape (Dynamic Range), the XF1 just about matches the XZ-2 iHS with 11.2 Evs to 11.3 Evs, and the LX7 offers a +1/2 Stop advantage with 11.7 Evs. Again, this is only at the base ISO sensitivity however, and at ISO100 or above all three cameras offer the same Dynamic Range.

For Sports (Low-light ISO), both the Olympus and Panasonic models feature the smaller 1/1.7-inch sensor, compared to the 2/3rds-inch Fujifilm EXR CMOS, so it’s little surprise the XF1 offers a +1/3 of a Stop improvement over the LX7. The Olympus XZ-2 iHS beats expectation however and surpasses the XF1 with 216 ISO to 199 ISO, but again the difference is very slight and neither camera is a good option in low light.

Fujifilm-XF1-dynamic2

Although the LX7 offers a +½ Stop Dynamic Range this is only at a measured ISO of 63 compared to 106 on the XF1 and from manufacturer ISO 100 they are the same and offer good Dynamic Range up to ISO 400.

Fujifilm-XF1-color2

The XF1 and XZ-2 iHS boasts a +1/3rds of a Stop improvement over the LX7 for Colour Depth despite them having very similar results at base ISO.