# Fujifilm X10 compact camera - stunning retro camera



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

Fujifilm have produced another beautiful rangefinder-styled camera sporting looks that I love.

It might look the same but it's quite a big leap down from their earlier X100 near-hit - there's no snazzy hybrid viewfinder and the sensor is but a wee slip of a thing compared to the X100.

But - damn! - I still want one!

http://www.wirefresh.com/canon-powershot-g12-10mp-compact-full-specs-phat-but-fat/


----------



## weltweit (Sep 2, 2011)

Yes, I was just reading about it on dpreview.

That is quite a fast lens.

I don't understand how the viewfinder works though.


----------



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

It looks wonderful, but I'd wager that the LX5 will produce images every bit as good for less dosh.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 2, 2011)

Very nice. I've met a few X100 owners and had a fair few plays myself. For my own sort of use I couldn't fault it. The lens is stunningly brilliant. The X100 is a victim of the current fashion for Street Photography as far as I can tell (price didn't help either, but I would still pay it). Every user I spoke to came up with the same, and only complaint - it wasn't very good for quick street shots.

FujiFilm never marketed it as a Street Photography camera. It was all the reviews likening it to an old skool RF. Understandably reviewers review for their readers uses. Many famous Street Photographers of the past used RF cameras, so the comparison was only natural, but it wasn't designed for that purpose.

Other than fast shooting sports and street use it delivers the best results I have ever seen from a compact digital camera. Being a bit of a style item I'm guessing current owners are going take very good care, meaning that second hand cameras are likely to be in A+ perfect condition. I'm waiting 

The X10 looks like a very nice alternative for less money.


----------



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

I really wanted to like the x100 - so much so that I was almost tempted to shell out the ludicrous asking price - but it was just too buggy and clunky.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 2, 2011)

I didn't find anything buggy, or clunky about it (unless you mean clunky as in slow AF), but I know many people were disappointed. It looked great and promised much, but it's not a fast shooting camera for the street, or the pitch.

If they've deemed it appropriate to release a similar, but cheaper camera, then I guess the X100 was a financial success anyway.

Perhaps the compromise for a very good digital, compact all rounder is just too much. Something will always have to give.


----------



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

The price premium was a bit hard to swallow for a camera that would actually freeze up for several seconds after taking a single RAW shot. If you're going to market something so it looks like a fast old-school street shooter it's always going to disappoint when it responds so slowly.

I've just started testing the Olympus ZX-1, btw. It doesn't feel so great in the hand but so far it seems very speedy.


----------



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

There's a hands on of the X10 here: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/41883/fujifilm-x10-ifa-hands-on-preview

God damn it looks lovely!


----------



## editor (Sep 2, 2011)

More lustworthy shots:


----------



## cybertect (Sep 3, 2011)

Agreed about that. I'd happily hang it round my neck.

Reminds me a bit of the Yahsica Electro 35 GTN, which I _do_ hang round my neck 




Yashica Electro 35 GTN by Ole1981, on Flickr


----------



## weltweit (Sep 3, 2011)

With these cameras - without a TTL viewfinder, how do you ensure you have focussed on your target?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Sep 3, 2011)

weltweit said:


> With these cameras - without a TTL viewfinder, how do you ensure you have focussed on your target?



It's usually a case of lining up dots in the viewfinder (there are variations). You point the camera at your subject to be focussed on and trun the lens until the 2 dots align on the subject. A bit like a surveyors old skool theodolite ting.

Do I mean theodolite?


----------



## cybertect (Sep 3, 2011)

weltweit said:


> With these cameras - without a TTL viewfinder, how do you ensure you have focussed on your target?



I does AF, but I must admit I was wondering about that as it's got a manual focus ring on the lens, but it's not a true rangefinder (which I think is what Stanley's alluding to)


----------



## cybertect (Sep 3, 2011)

Then again, with such a small sensor, obtaining critical focus will be less difficult in the first place.

There's no info at all displayed in the OVF, it's just  framing device

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/en/product/finder/index3.html

I imagine you'd have to use live view on the rear screen for MF.


----------



## cybertect (Sep 3, 2011)

editor said:


> http://www.wirefresh.com/canon-powershot-g12-10mp-compact-full-specs-phat-but-fat/



BTW, perhaps you meant to link to the Wirefresh story about the Fuji X10 instead of the Canon G12?


----------



## editor (Sep 4, 2011)

cybertect said:


> BTW, perhaps you meant to link to the Wirefresh story about the Fuji X10 instead of the Canon G12?


Quite possibly, yes


----------



## editor (Nov 23, 2011)

Here's a very enthusiastic review. It really is a lovely looking camera.







> The X10 fits beautifully in ones hand, in large measure because it isn't too small. I started this report with a discussion of how all camera designs are based on a series of trade-offs by their maker; sensor size vs image quality being paramount. Fujifilm has taken a path with the X-10 that calls for the largest possible sensor in a sort-of-pocketable camera, along with a fast lens of moderate range and a usable optical finder.
> 
> The quality of fit, finish and materials is first rate, and belies the camera's price point. For anyone over the age of forty or so, who remembers when cameras didn't feel like they were made from molded lumps of polycarbonate, the Fujifilm X-10 will bring a smile to your lips when you handle one, even if you don't decide to buy it.
> 
> Add smooth handling, along with image quality that really does challenge any of its competitors, and you have a compelling camera. It looks like the X-100 wasn't a one-off wonder, and that Fujifilm really does have its mojo back.



http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/fuji_x10_first_impressions.shtml


----------



## purves grundy (Nov 23, 2011)

How much do these things cost then? I haven't had a camera for a few years now and feel it's time to rectify.


----------



## editor (Nov 23, 2011)

purves grundy said:


> How much do these things cost then? I haven't had a camera for a few years now and feel it's time to rectify.


Around £500 (£420 is the cheapest I've seen). A Micro Four Thirds camera would give you better results and more flexibility, but they won't look anywhere near as good as this mutha!


----------



## purves grundy (Nov 23, 2011)

editor said:


> Around £500 (£420 is the cheapest I've seen). A Micro Four Thirds camera would give you better results and more flexibility, but they won't look anywhere near as good as this mutha!


Hmmm, I reckon I can stretch to that. I'll have a mooch round a few places when I'm in Bangkok in a few weeks - hopefully they'll be in stock.


----------



## editor (Nov 23, 2011)

purves grundy said:


> Hmmm, I reckon I can stretch to that. I'll have a mooch round a few places when I'm in Bangkok in a few weeks - hopefully they'll be in stock.


Note that it's a fair bit bigger then the LX5/S100. mind. Lovely looking thing though.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 19, 2012)

DxOMark rating is quite a bit better than for the LX5 and similar small-sensor compacts though, the best small sensor compacts are in the 40's, wheras the X10 scores 50.

A score of 50 is comparable to micro 4/3 cameras, although still way short of the X100's rather impressive score of 73 (which is the same overall IQ score as a Nikon D90 )

Obviously, that's just benchmarking and there are nuances, like 'Fuji colour', but it's interesting nonetheless.

Also, I wonder for street photography, is there any reason you can't just zone focus it? One would think that would work perfectly well unless Fuji have actively taken measures to fuck it up somehow.


----------



## paul russell999 (Feb 7, 2012)

I bought this camera about a week ago, and it does seem very good


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Feb 7, 2012)

paul russell999 said:


> I bought this camera about a week ago, and it does seem very good


Hello Paul - welcome back, keep us posted on your progress with this camera. Are you now one of the Emergency Services with your new i.d?


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2012)

Hello again Paul. Nice to have you back.

I had a play with the x10. It's a bit lighter than it looks and it was a bit of a pain having the barrel fill up a chunk of the viewfinder sight line, but any compact camera with an exposure compensation dial on the top is a winner in my book!

Any new pics to show us?


----------



## paul russell999 (Feb 8, 2012)

Hi Hocus, Editor. It's nice to be back. I like the x10 but haven't taken many photos as I have had some health problems that has made it hard for me to get out and about....


----------



## editor (Feb 8, 2012)

paul russell999 said:


> Hi Hocus, Editor. It's nice to be back. I like the x10 but haven't taken many photos as I have had some health problems that has made it hard for me to get out and about....


Sorry to hear that: I hope you get back to full health soon.

I looked long and hard at the x10 but decided that it wasn't _that_ much different from my LX5 in many regards, so my quest for a small, light but high quality camera goes on.

The new Olympus OM-D is definitely getting me interested seeing as it's much smaller than I expected (see other thread).


----------



## purves grundy (Feb 9, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Hello Paul - welcome back, keep us posted on your progress with this camera. Are you now one of the Emergency Services with your new i.d?


Indeed... almost took the plunge for one in Bangkok (they were going for about £400) but then ummed and erred and prevaricated my way off to the pub.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Feb 9, 2012)

paul russell999 said:


> I bought this camera about a week ago, and it does seem very good


 
Glad to see you back Paul


----------



## paul russell999 (Feb 11, 2012)

Hi Purves, Bernie


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 12, 2012)

paul russell999 said:


> I bought this camera about a week ago, and it does seem very good


 
The return of the wayfaring stranger! 
Welcome home!

Any latency or noise issues with it?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 12, 2012)

Bloke working at the processing shop I was at this afternoon had one of these - he liked it very much, said it was great for street photography. I must say it was an extremely nice-looking thing.


----------



## editor (Feb 12, 2012)

The do look really lovely indeed. The old school design suggest it's going to weigh more than it actually does, but I love the layout and the manual zoom.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 12, 2012)

Yes, he mentioned the manual zoom being great, and it's actually relatively compact - it was a bit bigger than the temperamental LC-A I was complaining about, but not vastly bigger. Maybe if I manage to get a new job I might treat myself.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2012)

Here's DPReview's conclusion: 



> Fujifilm makes no bones about the intended user base for the X10. If its high price doesn't scare off point and shooters, its massive array of dials and buttons will likely do the trick. Yet for those who desire quick and easy access to shooting modes and exposure parameters, the X10 offers a degree of manual control that rivals many entry-level DSLRs.
> 
> While the X10 is not without a few oddities and questionable feature implementations - it is a Fujifilm camera after all - it is largely free of the types of behavior that plagued its big brother, the FinePix X100 upon its release. The question for anyone still on the fence about the X10 really comes down to priorities. If you're looking for a truly pocketable large-sensor compact, you may be better served by considering the surprisingly small Sony DSC-RX100. If you're set on a nearly APS-C sized sensor in a reasonably compact form factor, then the Canon PowerShot G1 X is very tempting.
> 
> ...


Full review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x10/19


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 12, 2012)

A lot of similar compacts seem to get quite similar scores from them. I've been looking at things like the Panasonic GX1 (which is M4/3, though I'm not 100% convinced by the kit lenses) and the confusingly similarly named Canon G1X, and the LX5 and so on, and they all seem to be rated about as good as each other, to be honest.

(I'm thinking about selling the Lumix G2 I have and getting a more pocketable thing. If I have time and space to carry a big camera, I'm likely to take one of the excellent film cameras that I have - I don't really use the G2 very much. But where I see myself using digital is to get high quality pics with a camera I have in my pocket, which starts up and focusses fast and shoots in whatever light is around.)


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2012)

I warmly and wholeheartedly recommend the OM-D.

Interesting shoot out


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 12, 2012)

Oh, good call - I can't listen at the moment as there is a jazz band here, but I will later.

Everybody seems to love the OM-D. It is kinda £3-400 more than the others though.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 13, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Oh, good call - I can't listen at the moment as there is a jazz band here, but I will later.
> 
> Everybody seems to love the OM-D. It is kinda £3-400 more than the others though.


What an f-in awful video though. The sound was all over the place, I had plug it into my sound system to amplify it. The voices were up and down and hard to make out what was being said. Their was a lot of background noise and just to make things worse there was music played over it all. I conclude that they liked the OM-D. Nothing new to learn from that video. I think is might be quite old too. It was a pre-production model of the Olympus they 'reviewed'. I wonder what camera they used to make the video. I wouldn't buy one.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 14, 2012)

Okay, so I had a play with some of the ones I was looking at in assorted camera shops.

The Canon G1X is definitely out - the autofocus is slooooooow. I actually thought it wasn't working a few times because I must not have pressed the button enough, so took pictures accidentally. My cheapo pocket cam from about five years ago is faster than that, and the AF on the Lumices barely has any delay at all.

I like the GX1 more now. There was a Panasonic rep there who had one, and I had a quick go. They're not selling it with a pancake lens as kit, though - just either the 14-42 which I already have from the G2, or the new X model which has a motorised zoom (smaller, but no faster, and I don't like motorised zooms if I can help it).

They had the GF3 there for £200, which isn't bad money, but it feels dumbed down, or at least, all the options may be there but you have to go through umpteen menus to get to them. Apparently the GF5 is coming soon.

-

What _did_ impress me which I'd not seen before was the Olympus XZ-1 compact - it has a terrific-looking 28-112 lens which is f1.8-2.5 and will also focus really close. DPReview gave it a gold, I see now. It's a little menu-heavy but not as bad as the GF3. Fixed lens, but am I really going to need much outside of that range? So at the moment, it's either that, or possibly I might get the 14/2.5 Lumix pancake lens for the G2, see if that by itself makes the G2 small enough for me (which it might) and if not look at getting a GX1. I'm in no great hurry right now.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 14, 2012)

There are too many frigging Gs, Xs and 1s in camera names now. The GX1 with the motor zoom kit lens is called the GX1X


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What _did_ impress me which I'd not seen before was the Olympus XZ-1 compact - it has a terrific-looking 28-112 lens which is f1.8-2.5 and will also focus really close. DPReview gave it a gold, I see now. It's a little menu-heavy but not as bad as the GF3. Fixed lens, but am I really going to need much outside of that range? So at the moment, it's either that, or possibly I might get the 14/2.5 Lumix pancake lens for the G2, see if that by itself makes the G2 small enough for me (which it might) and if not look at getting a GX1. I'm in no great hurry right now.


I've got a XZ-1 here but haven't used it for months. I thought I was going to love it, but the truth is that I found the LX-5 to be a better all round performer.

There's rumoured to be a new LX camera out soon, btw. I'm hardly using my LX5 after I got the O-MD - with a pancake lens on, it's not much bigger at all, and the touch screen has proved surprisingly useful.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 14, 2012)

editor said:


> I've got a XZ-1 here but haven't used it for months. I thought I was going to love it, but the truth is that I found the LX-5 to be a better all round performer.


What was better about the LX5? I did have a play with it, but wasn't all that impressed, though of course it's hard to get a proper impression playing with a camera in Jessops.


editor said:


> There's rumoured to be a new LX camera out soon, btw. I'm hardly using my LX5 after I got the O-MD - with a pancake lens on, it's not much bigger at all, and the touch screen has proved surprisingly useful.


Yeah, I've found the touch screen on the G2 to be really handy. I thought I'd hate it (and I do sometimes - it's easy to move the autofocus spot by accident and you can't turn that off) but being able to change almost any significant shooting option with at most three taps is brilliant. That's one of the reasons I'm thinking of continuing with the Panasonics, because I know they have good touchscreens.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What was better about the LX5? I did have a play with it, but wasn't all that impressed, though of course it's hard to get a proper impression playing with a camera in Jessops.


I found that the LX 5 handled better and I just found it more intuitive to use. I've rarely felt inclined to pick up the XZ-, even thiugh it's right next to me.


FridgeMagnet said:


> That's one of the reasons I'm thinking of continuing with the Panasonics, because I know they have good touchscreens.


A lot of reviews put the OM-D touchscreen at the top of the pile - I definitely recommend trying one.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 14, 2012)

editor said:


> A lot of reviews put the OM-D touchscreen at the top of the pile - I definitely recommend trying one.


I would definitely like an OM-D - literally everyone I know (and whose tastes I know coincide with mine) raves about it. It's just out of my price range at the moment.

I think I'm right in the plan of staying with m4/3 right now though, with Olympus and Panasonic both making some excellent m4/3 cameras, and some great lenses around.

What lens do you use most with yours btw?


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I would definitely like an OM-D - literally everyone I know (and whose tastes I know coincide with mine) raves about it. It's just out of my price range at the moment.
> 
> I think I'm right in the plan of staying with m4/3 right now though, with Olympus and Panasonic both making some excellent m4/3 cameras, and some great lenses around.
> 
> What lens do you use most with yours btw?


Mainly the 14-50mm that came with the OM-D, and the Lumix 20mm f1.7.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 14, 2012)

While there are rumours of a new Lumix LX camera in the offing, there is the new Sony RX100 that has just arrived on the scene. It has a 28 -100mm equivalent zoom lens with f/1.8 at the wide end and a new bigger sensor (1"). It is also very small and will fit in the top pocket of a jacket. Competition is hotting up in the serious compact end of the market. It is also very expensive, but aren't they all? It has been reviewed by dpreview.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2012)

DSC-RX100 video here. Looks nice but the lack of physical controls might annoy.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 15, 2012)

Check our the full review on dpreview. It has physical controls

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-dsc-rx100


----------



## editor (Jul 15, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Check our the full review on dpreview. It has physical controls.


Yes, I know that. But there aren't as many as I'd like.


----------



## editor (Jul 15, 2012)

Ouch! The RX100 is nearly £550.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 15, 2012)

The lack of manual controls really put me off other models and I don't see that that has any more. I mean, dedicated manual controls, rather than a jog wheel to access menus.


----------



## editor (Jul 15, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The lack of manual controls really put me off other models and I don't see that that has any more. I mean, dedicated manual controls, rather than a jog wheel to access menus.


I forgot about the dial around the lens, which is handy. Mind you, I'd find the lack of a hotshoe possibly problematic on a £550 camera.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 15, 2012)

editor said:


> Ouch! The RX100 is nearly £550.


I doubt if the rumoured LX7 with its smaller sensor will come in any cheaper. We wait and see. I still love my LX3 and having bought accessories for it (optical viewfinder and filter attachment with polaroid filter, I cannot even move to LX5 which is not compatible with these. The prices of these small serious compacts has risen steadily. Perhaps dSLRS will come down in price as demand for them falls pro-rata to the rising interest in serious top end compacts. Only the ability to photograph with shallow depth of field gives the big dSLRs the advantage and the new Sony edges into that area with its wide aperture at the short end and its fairly long zoom.


----------



## editor (Jul 15, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> I doubt if the rumoured LX7 with its smaller sensor will come in any cheaper.


The sensor size is unknown as yet.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 15, 2012)

editor said:


> The sensor size is unknown as yet.


The sensor size on the LX series has been constant since the LX1. If they changed it now it would necessitate a model name change to promote it. Perhaps that will happen. It would be good to think that their spies had sussed out the development of the Sony 1" sensor and come up with a challenge. That would be excellent and their camera would be unrivalled especially if it was significantly cheaper than the Sony and had a hot shoe. I will not be putting my money in the betting shop though.


----------



## editor (Jul 15, 2012)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The sensor size on the LX series has been constant since the LX1.


No it hasn't. 


> In terms of sensor size, the LX3’s 1 /1.63in sensor is only slightly larger than the 1 /1.65in model on the LX2
> http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_LX3/lens.shtml


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jul 15, 2012)

editor said:


> No it hasn't.


Glad to see that you are engaging seriously with my comments. I think that 1/1.63in is not significantly larger than the 1/1.65in model, but I concede your point. The rest of that article reminds us just how good the LX3 is. I don't use enough of its features and have become lazy with it.

That Sony looks very tempting though but luckily I don't have enough money to waste. I still have an Olympus E420 that gets left on the shelf far too much. I need to take more pictures with the kit I already have.

Then I notice, the Samsung EX2F. This camera has a 24mm wide angle zoom lens (24 to 80mm) and an aperture of f/1.4. That is unbeatable for low light photography. It also has Wi-Fi connectivity for saving /sharing pictures. It is expected to be released in August. Lots of temptation for those with spare money.


----------



## cybertect (Jul 17, 2012)

Apparently someone at The Telegraph accidentally published their story on Panasonic's new cameras a day early   

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-full-panasonic-g5-image-leaks



> Also launched is the DMC-LX7 and DMC-FZ200. The former is a top of the line compact camera with a fast f1.4 Leica lens, 10.1 megapixel Mos sensor and 3-inch screen. The DMC-FZ200, which is due for release in late August or early September, replaces Panasonic’s FZ150 as its new flagship bridge camera. Included is a highly formidable 25-600mm lens, which is incredibly wide yet capable of zooming extreme distances. Even more impressive is that the lens on the FZ200 maintains a constant f2.8 aperture throughout.
> 
> Panasonic has led the way in the mirrorless market for a while now and the DMC-G5 is its latest attempt at ensuring things stay that way. The G5 is capable of things like full HD video recording and capturing images up to 12,800 ISO. Also announced alongside the G5 was two new lenses, an f2.8 12-35 Power O.I.S and a 45-150mm f4 lens.
> 
> ...


 
43rumors.com has been suggesting the LX7 will feature a larger sensor than the LX5 for a while.


----------



## editor (Jul 17, 2012)

cybertect said:


> 43rumors.com has been suggesting the LX7 will feature a larger sensor than the LX5 for a while.


I think it has to otherwise it's going to fall far behind its rivals - and the Lumix has always been one of the leaders.


----------



## cybertect (Jul 17, 2012)

editor said:


> I think it has to otherwise it's going to fall far behind its rivals - and the Lumix has always been one of the leaders.


 
Hmm. Prepare for disappointment...

LX-7 press release has been leaked now and it looks like its sensor is actually _smaller_ than the LX5.

http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-and-now-full-leak-in-russia-with-press-release-and-lx7-pics/#comments




			
				Mistral75 said:
			
		

> Look at focal lengths:
> - LX7: 4.7-17.7mm actual focal lengths, 24-90mm 24×36 equivalent focal lengths
> - LX5: 5.1-19.2mm actual focal lengths, 24-90mm 24×36 equivalent focal lengths (same as LX7)
> The shorter actual focal lengths of the LX7′s zoom lens means *LX7′s sensor is smaller than LX5′s sensor*.
> LX5′s sensor is 1/1.63 inch. LX7′s sensor should be 1/1.77 inch.


----------



## editor (Jul 17, 2012)

I think I'll wait for the official release although I can't really think of any reason to upgrade from my LX5.


----------



## weltweit (Dec 15, 2012)

Was in Big Tesco yesterday and they had an X10.....

It is absolutely tiny ... I have big hands .... I think it is too small for me.


----------



## editor (Dec 15, 2012)

The X10 is a fair bit bigger than the LX7, so I'd give that a miss too if you don't like small cameras. 
http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm-X10-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-LX7


----------



## paul russell999 (Dec 18, 2012)

I dropped and broke my Nikon D90 SLR a few months ago, so I've been using the X10 quite a bit recently (as it's my only camera!). No complaints, but if it's too small for you, it's too small...


----------



## weltweit (Dec 18, 2012)

paul russell999 said:


> I dropped and broke my Nikon D90 SLR a few months ago, so I've been using the X10 quite a bit recently (as it's my only camera!). No complaints, but if it's too small for you, it's too small...


Sorry to hear about your D90. I think it may be psychology that makes me think the X10 is too small for me, my Fuji S2 has a nice deep handgrip and it always feel secure even when only in my right hand. I just think that the X10 might not feel so secure.


----------



## editor (Dec 19, 2012)

The OM-D comes with a handy add-on grip so the fabulously compact camera can be made to fit your hand better.


----------

